Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is There A Market For The A3XX  
User currently offlineAirT85 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (15 years 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2121 times:

Airbus Industrie had said a while back that they were looking into building a "super jumbo" jet that is currently the A3XX. Do you think that there is a market large enough to support the plane in the next few years to come or will it be a disaster if the plane goes into production?

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3125 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (15 years 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1992 times:

I replied this in another topic about the A3XX but here it goes again.
When the 747 was being designed in the 60's, air transport experts thought that the future would be the supersonic jets (SST). Many airlines and even people at Boeing thought that the 747 was an airplane with a limited future because the SST was going to take all the business. They were wrong.

These are the kind of people that I see today, almost 40 years later, talking on how the A3XX will not have sucess. I was also sceptical but I'm starting to belive there are routes where the A3XX is required and where the theory of "more flights with less capacity" is not applicable, also the forecast in passengers carried is to increase.......

You know, sometimes, new products creates new markets.....

Luis, Faro, Portugal


User currently offline24291 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (15 years 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1985 times:

Here's a recent discussion of the same topic:

Let's talk about the A3XX

My contribution: Sure, there is a market.




User currently offlineTP343 From Brazil, joined May 1999, 312 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (15 years 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1979 times:

Here we go again...

The A3XX will be launched ONLY IF there are enough firm orders from top-airlines. Therefore, it will NEVER be a commercial disaster because if just a small number of airlines is interested, Airbus will not launch. Things are more simple that seems; they have already told this lots of times...

We here in this forum can discuss if it will be launched or not, but we can't discuss if it will be a commercial failure because it simply won't (Airbus words).

Regards,

TP343, São Paulo, Brazil.


User currently offlinePandora From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (15 years 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1972 times:

The effect of fragmentation is felt by most airlines-smaller jets, more frquent flight replaces widebodies.

User currently offlineF-WWKH From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (15 years 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1953 times:

Great. 72 Flights per day in a CRJ (Super-ER Version) between Los Angeles and Hong Kong. I look forward to that.

User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8114 posts, RR: 53
Reply 6, posted (15 years 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1957 times:

Anyone who thinks airlines can just keep adding frequencies is an idiot. Where are the runways? The US, which has the most space, biggest airports and best infrastrucure, is creaking at the seams and any flight at a hub spends half an hour minimum sitting on a taxiway burning fuel, waiting in a queue of twenty other narrow-bodied planes. That sucks. Think what it's like in Europe or Asia (Heathrow is a sixth the size of DFW and is one of the most important airports in the world, ditto Narita, Frankfurt et al). Much as we'd all like to choose from one of ten flights a day between London and Charlotte / Cinncinati / insert your own hub, it ain't possible, and with passenger numbers rising 5% year after year, then I would say there is going to be a massive market for the A3XX, and here's a further prediction: within ten years there will be a stretch or Boeing will trump Airbus with an even bigger transport. If you don't believe me then look at the figures for pax and projected growth. The only problem will be getting people to and from the airports, and big enough baggage claim carousels etc. The A3XX will be as succesful as the 747, and I'm not saying that cos I'm a big Airbus supporter, the market exists (or will). I'd almost prefer it if Boeing were the ones to build it, but they're in no shape to challenge the mighty AI in the heavy transport stakes.


fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (15 years 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1965 times:

Ditto Cedarjet!

If anyone here -really thinks- there is NO market for the A3XX and the world will just create airport slots forever and ever like lottery tickets, hedging on the efforts of US officials to get Open Skies agreements everywhere..then it's obvious the "Flat Earth Society" must be alive and well (LOL!).

If anyone has read thru or followed the recent US-Chinese and US-Japanese Bilateral aviation agreements, they are -far- from bending over and dropping their shorts being told to open up their airspace which in many cases is bursting at the seams as well or straining under the limits of antiquated ATC equipment, But then again, some will continue to assume same position like ostrich and bury deep into so much sand. (G)

Not many people have figured out that one of the objectives of these Open Skies agreements is to guarantee work for Boeing of course, US industry and government have a stake in looking out for each other.

If Boeing says it wants to go "this way" then government will do what it can to force the issue. Read that as, "Open Skies".

But to date, these have had limited success in Europe, with paltry success in Asia. If people honestly expect governments of Asia to open up landing slots to more US carriers scheduling flights as they see fit competing against their carriers which have3 yet to realize the economic operating environment the US is using with it's Deregulated environment

..then I have some -choice beachfront property- in the Gobi Desert to sell! (LOL!) Along with a bridge or two. (LOL!)

(The 75 CRJ ER flights from LAX-to HKG made me laugh out loud!...Fell off my chair reading that one!..Great one F-WWKH!!! HAHAHAHA!)

I'll repeat this ONE More Time campers...

Asia is Not the US..
Asia is NOT the US....
ASIA IS NOT THE US!!!!

Sheesh...When does it get through!? (LOL!)

Southwest Airlines and MetroJet dont fly here, We dont have billboards that say "Albuquickly on Southwest" or Regional Jet traffic the way it's being done -back there-..No we dont have Walmart yet either....Carrefour, Continent Hypermarket and Makro (a Dutch retailer) along with ShinKong Mitsukoshi (a Taiwanese/Japanese joint venture from the famous Mistukoshi Department store chain in Japan suffice for that (BTW..CarreFour soon to be the worlds second largest retailer I might add)

If one cares to look at a map and take some ideas of political boundaries and economic systems...We have several countries within 4 hours of flying time from where I'm located and guess what..they arent states under one flag. They are individual countries with their own ways of doing things...And yes...the people travel for the most part on WIDEBODY airplanes out here, sometimes sold completely out, and it will become that as the Asian Economy recovers from the meltdown in 1997. It's already on it's way back in a massive way. This is going to -completely- debunk the Boeing market forecast.

Read ---Absolutely, TOTALLY, In SPADES Debunk--- their market forecast..and nothing they or the US government tries to do negotiating Open Sky treaties to cover their market plans and forecasts are going to change this.

OK?..Understand..I hope so..(LOL!) It's hysterical ---trying--- to get this point across. But..someday..I hope it will. I only live here and follow the news, I'm very much in touch with the government and business community here and the region -I have to-.

Anyhow..I think I make my point here, In closing here's a snippet from Reuters,
It appears we'll be able to book those A3XX flights in 2005. I'll be thinking of this "There's No Market for the A3XX" pablum while sipping a glass of champagne on a -probable- Cathay Pacific A3XX as it wings it's way from Hong Kong to New York...nonstop.

Why...if we fly over Seattle or near it..I'll toast the mighty Boeing Company facilites below..in "salute" for their "absolute confidence and oh-so-accurate -market-projection from a scant few years before"...(try speaking that with an impersonation of Walter Cronkite..kinda gets the comedic manner I intend it..(LOL!).....Laugh with glee and have another glass... (LOL!)

Regards
MAC_Vet

----------------------------------------------------------
Take off for giant Airbus plane seen in 2005-paper

Reuters Story - August 29, 1999 22:18

LONDON, Aug 30 (Reuters) - European aircraft consortium Airbus Industrie [ARBU.CN] is pressing ahead with plans to build the world's biggest aircraft in 2005, the Guardian newspaper reported on Monday.

But it said British Trade and Industry Secretary Stephen Byers had told consortium member British Aerospace that Airbus had to take more positive steps to turn itself into a public company before his government would pay 500 million pounds ($793.1 million) in grants for the project.

The Guardian quoted British Aerospace (BAe), which owns 20 percent of Airbus, as saying it would build the A3XX's wings and had drawn up plans to extend its Broughton plant near Chester in northern England.

Toulouse-based Airbus would build 48 of the double-decker aircraft, designed to carry around 600 people, in its first year of production and the project would create an extra 22,000 jobs in Britain, the paper said.

The A3XX's development costs have been estimated at up to $12 billion.

BAe has applied for up to 500 million pounds in repayable aid from the British government, and the Guardian reported BAe executives as saying they could not develop the project any further if Byers persisted with his demand for more progress on transforming the Airbus corporate identity by November.

A meeting of the Airbus board in that month will decide whether to launch the A3XX, intended to compete with rival Boeing's 747 jumbo jets.

The Airbus consortium comprises Aerospatiale Matra , Daimler-Benz Aerospace , British Aerospace and Spain's Construcciones Aeronauticas SA (CASA).($1=.6304 Pound)


User currently offlineJohans From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (15 years 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1937 times:

You know... most domestic flights between big airports like Tokyo-Haneda - Osaka Itami or Tokyo Haneda - Sapporo Chitose are operated with Boeing 747's, albeit a special domesticated version. The A3XX would give more room on already packed full flights between destinations like these. Also in international markets like San Francisco/Los Angeles/New York - Tokyo/Hong Kong/Sydney/London/Paris/Frankfurt these planes would be able to carry more passengers... maybe then BA wouldn't have to fly into SFO 2 times a day with 744's, although that would be too bad.  

Moi,
Kai


User currently offlineWingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2260 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (15 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1940 times:

and here we go again. Thanks MAC for another anti-US diatribe running clo four pages. Open Skies is a US government plot to guarantee work for Boeing? Yawn, the IQ count is dipping into double digits again. Too much MSG over the weekend?

Cedarjet, Boeing cannot challenge the Mighty Airbus? The IQ count is dipping into single digits on this statement. Since Airbus doesn't have any of its own money, you must've been referring to other compnaies or governments. Where is the $12-15 billion coming from?

There is a market for everything at the right price. How much cost over an infinitely cheaper 747 stretch will the market bear? $10 million per model, $20 million? Will JAL and the rest pay a $20 million premium over a new 747 stretch for domestic cattle herd routes? We'll see. Airbus will make it, but not at a profit for a long long time if ever.

To anyone who thinks that this plane is required due to slot restrictions, you are a flat earth society founder. An extra 100 pax per plane will never ever ever cope with a 5% annual increase in pax numbers. Do the math. New airports will be built and existing ones will be expanded, or is Asia just simply going to stop building? This region is still in its economic infancy compared to the industrialized nations. There will be mad infrastructure building giong on for the next 50 years. This is the cornerstone of nation-building and it will most definitely include new slots and new airports.

In 2005 Airbus will be a public enterprise with shareholders and tax obligations. Welcome to the real world of economic competition. Better pray like hell for 120 firm orders.


User currently offlineCiro From Brazil, joined Aug 1999, 662 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (15 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1933 times:

Jumbo and mega-jumbo jets are inferior products not in terms of equipment quality, but in terms of the service they are aiming to provide: high-density, low frequency, hub-to-hub routes.

I think the hub-and-spoke system will start to deteriorate itself in both Europe and US in the years to come. As the citizens of these regions get richer, they also get some pride and dignity. They will not mind paying a little extra to be treated like people and not like cattle.

Surely there is a market for such larger aircraft. Asian routes and airports with slot restriction. Because Asia is at an early stage of development in air travel, Asians will not mind being treated like cattle, flying in tight seats, eating the cheapest in-flight food available, being afraid of the rude flight attendant, etc... Just like Americans do now. Also, Asia has over 3 billion people to be transported and the US has "only" 250 million. Regarding slot restrictions, selective airports, like London Heathrow, Frankfurt Main, Chicago O'Hare and Tokyo Narita already have space problems due to busy air traffic. Airlines willing to fly these routes may purchase mega-jumbos.

Therefore, we conclude that some airlines may use the mega-jet. However, what has to be measure are the development costs and the number of these new jets required. Not all airports have slot restrictions and not all potential Asian airlines have the money to buy mega-jets.
Boeing forecasted the world would need 500 and Airbus forecasted 1,500 of them.

The development costs are about 15 billion dollars. Boeing decided it cannot break-even the production costs with 500 airplanes. Airbus, which is heavily subsidised by European governments, took the risk to do so and the new plane should be ready by 2005, I think.

Unfortunately, I am not a judge and I don't have their expertises to say which one of these two manufacturers is right. However, I am curious to know what the results will be.

Cheers



The fastest way to become a millionaire in the airline business is to start as a billionaire.
User currently offlineCiro From Brazil, joined Aug 1999, 662 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (15 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1929 times:

Dear Wingman,

I appreciated your inputs. Regarding the following quote "To anyone who thinks that this plane is required due to slot restrictions you are a flat earth society founder", you should blame the directors of Singapore Airlines, Malaysia Airlines and Qantas and not us. They were the ones who said that passenger traffic increment to some busy airports could only be done if larger aircraft were used because of slot restriction.

Best regards



The fastest way to become a millionaire in the airline business is to start as a billionaire.
User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (15 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1931 times:

Wingman

Your incredible belief that the US Government doesnt work to further US business interests is absolutely -scatological-. If you -actually believe- that bilge, then I must get in touch with my real estate agent in the Gobi Desert and get that beachfront property ready for sale..I'm going to be rich!

No plots at all..mere facts are what they are. If you cannot understand that then I guess it's an utterly hopeless case in convincing you otherwise.

To believe the US government and major US industires are completely oblivious of each other ad what they represent..Good Grief! I cant believe it. This image of "Oh So Innocent..so Virginal and Pious US Business and Government not helping each other out"..I have my harp tuned over that one.

And..yet again...you are turning this into an Anti-US spun matter, tapping into those emotional heartstings...let's have a flag raising ceremony while we're at it Wingman..That's NOT the intention of this debate!

When the -pure-fact-is- government assistance to industry -exists everywhere- and if you honestly think that the US government doesnt aid it's business community..then again..it's been an utterly useless exchange from the git-go.

Puh-leaase!

Airports..and infrastructure, again..wrong..just ask the farmers that are -still- holding onto their property opposing any expansion of the Narita Airport..but then again in your world that doesnt exist..even though it's the truth. Bulldozers and concrete mixers can just do anything they please so your interests are met. Again..wrong. It dont work that way -here-.

Why land is just up for grabs everywhere (Especially in Japan of all countries!)...Why..the whole country is on sale..they are just pouring concrete for Denver sized airports arent they?...

Please..get real..when is the last time you checked the population density there and the -real politikof Asia- ?..Do you have -any- understanding of Asia when it comes to this?

Regards from MSG Land (Boy...any more cliche's up that stock market maven's sleeve?)

MAC_Vet


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29799 posts, RR: 58
Reply 13, posted (15 years 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 1921 times:

While vainly attempting to avoid a Boeing-Airbus,US-Europe, discussions I do what to say that I do tend to feel that the current project demand that is put up by Airbus for the A-3xx or any "super-jumbo" is somewhat optimistic.

I don't think that the inital market will be that large and I think that it will take longer to mature then is being projected. Of course as the market for the aircraft matures there will be more demand.

It probably could be a replay of the inital sales figures for the 737 with the A-3xx. Ultimately successful but after a slow startup period.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineWingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2260 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (15 years 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

First of all MAC, you stated that Open Skies is intended to keep work at BOEING. Since Open Skies does not specify which aircraft are flown in the newly opened skies, your point is downright ignorant. Open skies is meant to foster competition among AIRLINES, not AIRLINER TYPES. Were you officer material?

I've admitted in previous posts that, of course, governments promote the companies of their individual countries. But your incessant anti-US posting leaves me a little annoyed in that you always fail to mention the fact that the US is the VERY BEST in an imperfect world. There is balance here. Let's see if you can name the last time any European or Asian country broke up a monopoly like AT&T, Standard Oil, or Microsoft. How about the last time a private citizen sued a corporation for wrongdoing or negligence? Look at the difference MAC. You may be familiar with the terms Chaebol and Keiretsu, perfect examples of how Asian governments coddle huge, grossly innefficient conglomerates at the expense of the public. This is in your own backyard and the best you can do is Open Skies? I see your canoe going downriver, but a lot of it's oars are out of the water.

Next, what was the number of Asian travelers last year? I don't know myself, but let's say 100 million. At 5% growth per year, that number will grow to 127 million by 2005. How will the A3XX accomodate 27 million extra pax all by itself? How the hell will terminals cope? What about parking? There is an ancient law of economic called supply and demand...and as far as Japan is concerned, their latest mega-airport was built on water. Lokks like the land shortage didn't stop them one bit.


User currently offlineUdo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (15 years 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1916 times:

Amen, Wingman.

As usual you show the world your great range of knowledge. But not only knowledge, you also show us little limited-thinking individuals what the future will exactly provide.

I'm impressed. Why don't you found the Wingman Group of Forseeing Future Development (WGFFD)? Get an aviation guru? Make money with it?

Send me a membership form please. I will definitely join your club.
Maybe you can not only tell developments in aviation, but also in sports?
How about my favourite German soccer club 1860 Munich? Will they win the championship in May 2130?

Hey, still remember the weapon called A-I-R-B-U-S which I explained in one of my recent posts?
The fuel of the rocket is MONEY. Everybody knows it. And over here, we really would pay monster taxes for the A3XX to get it airborne and successful. We the Europeans are Airbus, did you got it finally? That means we pay everything for it. Who cares about costs?
Yes Wingman, as usual you're absolutely right. Congratulations.

To all people reading this: This is an ironic post. Ironic posts are exclusively reserved for people who just ignore facts, ignore arguments and always think they are right.
Sorry, but anything else doesn't fit at those guys.
Enjoy

Regards
Udo


User currently offlineWingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2260 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (15 years 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1906 times:

Humor and Germans rarely mix well, humor and Udo do not mix at all.



User currently offlineAdministrator From Sweden, joined May 1999, 3251 posts.
Reply 17, posted (15 years 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1912 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
SITE ADMIN

Guys,

Lay off the personal attacks, there's no need to go there. Further posts of this nature will be deleted and the thread archived.

Johan



Working on the site from morning 'till night that's livin' alright (1997-2007)
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...
Is There A Market For The A3XX posted Mon Aug 30 1999 01:24:53 by AirT85
Is There A Market For A 787-7? posted Wed Aug 16 2006 22:05:00 by 1337Delta764
Is There A Market For Scheduled Flights To VCV? posted Tue Aug 1 2006 02:29:38 by SBNair3022
Is There A Market For A 90-160 Seat Props? posted Thu Mar 16 2006 14:32:46 by PavlovsDog
Is There A Market For Supersonic Airliners? posted Fri Nov 5 2004 07:22:37 by Gregviperrt
Is There Market For A Fourth Alliance? posted Fri Nov 14 2003 09:28:58 by Jopavon
Is There A Market For MRS-JFK? posted Mon May 14 2001 21:07:17 by Ezra
Is There A Website For The Airplane Junk-yards? posted Thu Aug 3 2000 18:05:25 by RWally
Zurich (ZRH) Is Getting Ready For The A 380 posted Thu Oct 26 2006 13:55:08 by ZRH
Why Is There A Gap Between The 787-3 And 787-8? posted Tue Sep 19 2006 05:00:13 by JAM747