par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 6522 posts, RR: 8 Reply 3, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 21135 times:
Well if the mergers are being done because consolidation is required and too much capacity exist in the US network how will that help the A380, one would expect that ultimately what the combined carrier will do is to reduce capacity, the bulk of their international feed is domestic and they cannot control the domestic market to a national degree. Will any US carrier operate A380's on international routes only with no domestic turns?
The main reason mergers have not yet reduced capacity to a level to allow massive increases in fares is because they have not yet found a way to remove competition by mergers. So you combine UA and CO, DL and NW, but until you can get rid of AA, US, WN, B6, AS etc. you cannot control capacity in the market place to any national level. The US domestic market is still a larger portion of US carriers product than their international arms and that market is still influencing the international market.
par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 6522 posts, RR: 8 Reply 7, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 20835 times:
Quoting francoflier (Reply 5): There's the small matter of convincing CO and DL to buy Airbus aircrafts...
Give them a big enough discount and they will buy, the idea that US carriers are "nationalistc" is not based on firm grounds. AA operated Airbus a/c, the combined DL/NW does also, when they sent A330's to storage over the xmas period they could have left them there if there really was an anti-Airbus bias, but when traffic picked up they bought them back versus 767's they had previously retired, what does that say?
Operating Airbus a/c is also a financial benefit to Airbus as they have to buy spares, update firmware, continued training, there are a lot of additional financial incentives which go beyond simply purchasing a/c. If the bias is there against buying Airbus it has to be financial, why support in other areas?
burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7481 posts, RR: 9 Reply 8, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 20751 times:
Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 1): The UA and NW 744s must be amongst the oldest flying, so will soon need replacement by something, 748s or 380s.
Half the NW fleet is from 1998 or later. The oldest one is from 89, hardly that old for those frames.
Quoting iliribdl (Reply 4): I've said it before, I see DL getting a few in next 5 years.
I doubt it, DL isn't interested in anything bigger than the 744, which they have said before, and were actually planning originally to get rid of the 744's. I would think at DL the replacement for the 744 is the 773 or whatever else comes a long in the next several years, the A380 is airport limited and not something I don't think any US carrier is interested in.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
frigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1388 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 20517 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 2): Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 1):
The UA and NW 744s must be amongst the oldest flying, so will soon need replacement by something, 748s or 380s.
Wow PM, did this suggestion really originate frome you? I don't have to remind you that they have General Evil engines
But you have a point. Airbus' motivation is that airlines can only grow at slot-restricted airports wit bigger airplanes. That's undoubtedly true, but it also is a fact that airlines from the US now send airplanes not bigger than 772's over the Atlantic - and often just 757's, 767's or A330's. So they can grow by using airplanes like A350-1000 or 77W (or whatever Boeing comes up with of that size).
I also must say that I see quite some optimism in their forecast, like delivering 819 superjumbo's between 2019 and 2028. 82 per year! And that's on average, it would be quite an accomplishment if they can do that already by 2019...
CHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62 Reply 11, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 20517 times:
It will be a very chilly day in the Hell region with snows forecast, the day any US airline buys an A380.
If it were the only +300 seat transport available anywhere under any circumstances, were built under license in Georgia by Northrop-Grumman and only used USA-made components throughout, and Airbus were giving them away for free they still wouldnt buy it.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
rheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2156 posts, RR: 6 Reply 12, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 20466 times:
Quoting par13del (Reply 3): Well if the mergers are being done because consolidation is required and too much capacity exist in the US network how will that help the A380
Do you think the overall capacity reduction will happen at the cost of the consolidated airlines? E.g. the new Delta will eventually shrink to the size of the old DL only having absorbed one competitor? Surely not! More likely the overall capacity reduction will happen at the cost of the less efficient smaller players. That leaves the merged airline with the need to steam the full combined capacity. Which may validate A380's. Unless a high frequency of long haul flights is more efficient.
par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 6522 posts, RR: 8 Reply 13, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 20304 times:
Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 12): Do you think the overall capacity reduction will happen at the cost of the consolidated airlines?
No, but that seems to be what many people think, there is also the notion that too much capacity exist in the US market place due to Chpt.11 while overlooking one major fact, the folks investing in those failed airlines can just spend their funds setting up a new airline, so how do you eliminate the desire of the investors?
Any US carrier presently operating routes into Europe can use the A380, no question about that, where their problem resides is in determining how to utilize the a/c when it's not flying, most long haul routes require 3 a/c, having an a/c with the capabilities of the A380 sitting doing nothing as a back-up a/c is not efficient or economical. The domestic runs that these a/c can be scheduled on within the continential US is the limiting factor for the A380, 748-i, 747 and 77W.
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 16529 posts, RR: 48 Reply 15, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 20309 times:
Quoting PM (Thread starter): "Delta could also use the A380 across the Pacific primarily, but also on New York-London services."
You gotta be kiddding. NYCLHR is a market that demands frequency, not volume. I'm not even convinced BA/VS will send them to JFK. DL hubs outside of JFK are unlikely to see any 380s period, let alone DL's.
SR4ever From Luxembourg, joined Mar 2010, 797 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 20048 times:
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 15): You gotta be kiddding. NYCLHR is a market that demands frequency, not volume. I'm not even convinced BA/VS will send them to JFK. DL hubs outside of JFK are unlikely to see any 380s period, let alone DL's.
People will want more frequency on LHR-NYC, but congestion at LHR may require a freeze of frequency at a later stage, and thence an offer increase through bigger aircrafts.
In 10yrs' time, LHR will probably see *lots* of 380s in daily operation, from some near 20 different airlines (such as BA, VS, EK, EY, QR, IT, TG, MH, SQ, QF, CZ, KE, AI, 9W, CX, CA, MU, OZ, NH). Only DXB will do better, but primarily owing to EK monster orders and monster policy.
It would be very surprising not to see a DL or UA 380 in such 380 festival
boilerla From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 298 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 19460 times:
Quoting SR4ever (Reply 19): It would be very surprising not to see a DL or UA 380 in such 380 festival
I believe when UAL announced their widebody order, they specifically said the A350 would be replacing their 747s. It's a capacity reduction of about 5%, but UAL also has 25 options for 350s they can use if they feel the need to expand.
The new UA/CO might be more open to buying Airbus than CO was, but the new United will have orders for over 75 widebodies when the merger completes. That's a heck of a lot of widebodies. Granted, most are replacing 767s and 747s, but still.
MarcoPoloWorld From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 613 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (3 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 19388 times:
Although not necessarily a breakthrough, I think the supposition that "mergers are good for the A380 in USA" is a solid one. The flightglobal graph implies that Airbus thinks that the EIS for those frames (which may include 748s) will be largely in the next decade. But it is 60+ frames, however - a substanial potential order value.
I generally agree that DL and (the new) UA would be the candidates, and that LAX/JFK/SFO are the primary VLA gateways we are looking at here. Exciting times ahead indeed.
25 SR4ever: NRT is indeed a longer way off than LHR. HND would be a different story, though. Assuming that European partner airlines are willing to do so, and th
26 astuteman: The two don't necessarily need to be mutually exclusive... If an airline is already offering, say, 3 - 4 x 772 and 2 x 744 daily between NYC and LHR,
27 AirlineEcon: If you look at how delta has changed it's NRT ops, the merger seems to have made it less likely they need the 380 for trans-pacific flights. We've see
28 GSPflyer: DL is much more likely to replace the 744s with 77W, or possibly 748. I think theres more of a chance of UA/CO ordering the A380 than DL, but still no
29 BlueFlyer: Who is going to buy 40 A380s in Africa?!? There aren't that many corrupt head-of-states to build 40 ACJs and I doubt SA would need them!
30 DLPMMM: Considering that DL got it's current slots at LHR on loan from KL/AF, the EU rules obviously don't prohibit such arrangements. Cutting a commuter fli
31 MaverickM11: Yes, and there are lots of those on order. Not so much 380s, by anyone other than EK. 2 for UU and 38 for....?
32 fcogafa: The Airbus predictions are always wildly in excess of Boeing's, and history has always shown Boeing's to be more realistic.
33 BMI727: Delta is just now refurbishing them, so don't count on those orders anytime soon. If he says never, he'll never get paid.
34 2707200X: I just don't see A380s joining any American airline, they just don't have the money or in many cases space at the airports. I think the trend is to go
35 EMBQA: Airbus is projecting 1100 more A380 sales in just the next 18 years....??? Shoot.. it took them 9 years just to break 200 in sales and that's still w
36 BMI727: Well, there was the small matter of a global recession.
37 FRA-Runway: I completely disagree. The A380 has lower fuel costs per pax, and this advantage will be even much more significant, when the oil price will be back
38 EMBQA: That really has only been over the last 3 years.. not all of it covers the time period of the A380 sales... plus airlines project the future. Even th
39 SR4ever: It may change, though. Circumventing the coordinator is not so welcome in Brussels. Agreed, but that implies that there will be a slot available at t
40 ER757: On a recent trip to ORD, I was observing all the UA 744's coming and going and thought to myself that they'd have to have VLA of some sort in their fl
41 DfwRevolution: That may excuse 2008-2010. But since 2001, Boeing has sold approximately 600 777 and 850 787 while Airbus has sold approximately 700 A330s and 600 A3
42 astuteman: No, they're not And two years before that, the programme was delayed, which unquestionably damaged sales.. Have a look at what has happened to 787 sa
43 XaraB: Since the 3rd LHR runway seems to be off the charts in the near future (20 yrs), the already near maxed-out LHR has to cope with air traffic growth wi
44 par13del: If the buzz continues on the A380 I can see a US carrier purchasing a minimum number to operate a couple long hauls as a "novelty" item. Now to expla
45 avek00: More to the point, USA legacy carriers don't have a need for the A380.
46 AADC10: When placing the order for 50 787s and 50 A350s, UA said that the A350 will be replacing the 744s and 772s. Airlines have learned over the last few y
47 328JET: This is exactly what i wrote several times here. The US carriers will operate the A380, otherwise they will loose traffic to the competition AND produ
48 SR4ever: Agreed, the troubled 380 production launch and the related knock-on effet had a desastrous impact on the image and the sales, particularly at a time
49 MaverickM11: I really don't think there's a meaningful difference. It's a niche plane that few carriers need, outside the usual suspects. The plane has been on sa
50 gkirk: Can't see any US carriers operating WhaleJets.
51 SR4ever: Certainly a niche aircraft, with not more than some 30 potential customers by 2020. There might be a bit more customers, such as smaller airlines nee
52 ScottB: It's easy to explain to the shareholders if the smaller aircraft (777's, 787's, A330's, A350's) are being filled at good yields and the airline is ma
53 328JET: @ MaverickM11 Few sales...? A very economic aircraft, that has more than 200 orders plus options from the blue chips of the blue chips...
54 BMI727: I think a lot of airlines learned their lesson with that when the 747 showed up. Well, when you basically start and end the decade with a recession,
55 SR4ever: I agree with you on unit costs: they will be lower only if loading are high. But there is one more thing to take into account: with BA, VS, LH, AF op
56 ukoverlander: It seems to me there are a lot of A-netters with little American flags next to their names who may very well burst into tears and start pounding the f
57 XaraB: As aircraft this big obviously has a much narrower market niche than a 300 seater, and cost a lot more, their orders will naturally be "a handful" of
58 SonomaFlyer: UA's 744 routes have generally flown full. From what folks on these boards have said, the yields are good. They will need to be replaced sooner rather
59 Boeing1970: Fuel cost is irrelivant if you can't fill the seats in a 500 seat aircraft. A380 = too big for any US carrier, pre or post merger. Thsi is due to the
60 BMI727: It would be cool to see more A380s over here, but the fact is that there are a lot of factors conspiring against it.
61 MaverickM11: I'm sure it's a great plane but 200 orders in 10 years, especially when 80 of them are for EK, is a bit slow. It's certainly not helpful that the gen
62 EPA001: That may be, but the statement which Airbus has made holds some truth. The mergers are increasing the chances of new VLA's being purchased by US Airl
63 Viscount724: But 234 orders and only 30 delivered to 5 customers 10 years after the A380 launch isn't very impressive. During the same 10 year period after the 74
64 EPA001: But there are also about 10 times more choices for (fairly) large, long range aircraft then there were when the B747-100 was introduced. That sort of
65 328JET: There are a lot of factors against the A380 for US airlines, but only on a.net... A merge results in fewer frequencies with bigger airplanes. I do not
66 FlyNWA727: I'm by no means an aviation analyst expert, but from what I do know or have observed, if U.S. carriers aren't worried about losing out to the competi
67 328JET: I do not believe that US carriers learned their lessons, or how do you explain all the mergers the last years?
68 Boeing1970: The fundamental structure of the merging carriers is not changing in terms of size to the positive; therefore, the chances are unchanged. They are no
69 328JET: @ Boeing1970 "...smaller, not larger aircraft" If this would really be true, all ordered US longrange aircrafts of the last years are a wrong choice..
70 BMI727: No. It results in an overall drop in capacity. Whether this comes at the expense of frequency or size is another matter completely, but is most likel
71 FlyNWA727: And yet the fact remains that NO U.S. operator has anything larger than a 77E/77L. From the 777-200 airframe, we have: the A346, 77W, 744, A380, and
72 Boeing1970: Totally untrue. The trend has been for equivalent, incremental aircraft of 30-50 seats more or smaller aircraft. 747s have been replaced with 777s. 7
73 FlyNWA727: Agreed. Pan Am probably never thought in a million years that they would have sealed their fate flying the queen of the skies. The 747 was—in many
74 328JET: @ Boeing1970 Sorry, but you should investigate a little more. A lot of aircrafts in the last two decades up to now were/will be replaced by bigger air
75 WingedMigrator: The nice thing about US airlines is that their pencils are generally pretty sharp. Because of this, the decision to purchase the A380 (or not) will be
76 FlyNWA727: You're not making much sense here. You seem to be playing a game of semantics and taking the words "equal sized aircraft" to their literal meaning. T
77 SR4ever: 23 orders per annum for 10 years. Not a big fiasco, but could have been better. 9/11 SARS and then the mess at Airbus have had an adverse impact. 31
78 ikramerica: Good luck with that projection, Airbus. No US carrier has bought a VLA in 15 years and most have decided on 300 seaters for the future, but that doesn
79 BMI727: Or you could since you totally dismiss the number of planes involved. Many 772s also replaced older 747s. Had 747s, and then retired them. Also, the
80 Boeing1970: When they were being replaced, the DC-10s had 287 or 298 seats depending on the variant and the 777's came with 278 seats. Americans DC-10s had 287 s
81 1337Delta764: Except for the L-1011-500s, which had fewer seats than the 764ER. Also, part of the reason why the L-1011-1/250s had more seats than the 764ERs was d