Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Should The A380-900 Been Launched From The Get-go?  
User currently offlineYYZALA From Canada, joined Nov 2009, 155 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10446 times:

Have Airbus launched the A389 from the beginning, how do you think their orders would have looked today? Would it be the ultimate killer on CASM or would airlines have trouble filling all the seats? Would the 748i have more sales? Please discuss  

[Edited 2011-11-05 09:05:27]

16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31098 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10274 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Airbus followed the standard plan - release the "baseline" model now and then offer the "stretch" down the road to take advantage of better economics and traffic growth.

If Airbus had launched the A380-900, it would have likely been the only model offered (as the A380-800 would have been a "shrink" and offered poorer operating economics). The A380-800 already handily out-classed the 747-400 on size and operating economics, so I don't think the A380-900 would have been embraced any stronger than the A380-800 was.

I don't think an A380-900 only offering would have helped the 747-8 much, if at all.


User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 3075 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10244 times:

I seem to remember a lot of people talking about the A380(-800) simply being too big, and it will see very little orders. Then EK came along, things have changed. Now, people want the -900 to come.

So, I wonder what the response would have been if the A380 was launced as the -900. There would have been even bigger doubts (but I am inclined to think that EK would have wiped those doubts as well).

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 3, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 9679 times:

Quoting YYZALA (Thread starter):

Have Airbus launched the A389 from the beginning, how do you think their orders would have looked today?

Less. The larger you go, the less aircraft you need.

Quoting YYZALA (Thread starter):
Would it be the ultimate killer on CASM or would airlines have trouble filling all the seats?

The A380-800 is already the ultimate killer on CASM. The -900 would be even better, but the problem is the latter (capacity), not CASM, even for the -800.

Quoting YYZALA (Thread starter):
Would the 748i have more sales?

Probably. The gap between the next largest aircraft would have been wider, giving the 747-8 more room to work in.

Tom.


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3417 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 9605 times:

no, but they should have made the A388 the baseline instead of the shrink. I don't think there would be much discussion about the 748i and Airbus would have captured more orders from 77W customers.

There is a huge amount of wieght locked up in the current A388 that is there only for its future A389 and A388F versions. The future A389 might not be quite as impressive, but clearly Airbus was going to have to wait a decade or two to launch the A389 even if the program ran flawless. Thats enough time to buy back range and MTOW growth using technology instead of a larger heavier base frame.


User currently offlineTheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3626 posts, RR: 29
Reply 5, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 9526 times:

Don't forget that engine technology made significant improvements in the last few years. So we might see a new A380-900 with much more advanced engines than the current engines used in the 800. So maybe the 900 will have the same range as the current 800 (or at least comparable performance), which would not have been possible if the 900 had been launched already some years ago.

User currently onlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10105 posts, RR: 97
Reply 6, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 7802 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 4):
no, but they should have made the A388 the baseline instead of the shrink.

I have to say I completely agree with that

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 4):
The future A389 might not be quite as impressive, but clearly Airbus was going to have to wait a decade or two to launch the A389 even if the program ran flawless. Thats enough time to buy back range and MTOW growth using technology instead of a larger heavier base frame.

And that is the reason why   .

I'd love to be able to see the specs for an A388 that was designed to be an A388, and not an A389, or A380F

Rgds


User currently offlineMortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3985 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 7745 times:

Was'nt there talk about an A380-1000 version too ? Or have I missunderstood something ?

User currently offlinesolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 854 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 7092 times:

What the A380-900/1000 would look like, enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDj4heZU6do

//Mike      



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12158 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 6440 times:

IIRC, the A-3XX/A-380 was launched as a family of aircraft, like most new airplane programs of today. The A-380 family would have had two members to start the program, the A-380-800 and the A-380-800F, and then a follow on model, the A-380-900. This is why the A-388 has the wing it does, optimized for the heavier "F" and -900 models. This would save money and engineering resourses later in the program by just designing one wing for all models. The A-380-1000 was at one time thought to be the next streched model, but now, if Airbus ever goes to the -900 model, it could be as long the -1000 would have been, out to 87m. IIRC, one of the leasing companies is pushing for the 87m version of the A-389, while EK would prefer a lenght of 80m-85m.

User currently offlineAirbusA370 From Germany, joined Dec 2008, 253 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6094 times:

Actually, an A380-700 was also planned as a gap-filler between the A340-600 and A380-800 and direct replacement of 747-400s.

But that plane is not going to happen anymore, the A350-1000 should have much better economics and offers almost the same size...


User currently offlinegoblin211 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 1209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4504 times:

The way I see it, it's like launching the 2012 model of a car before the 2011 version. You want the latest and most efficient, etc. I don't see why Airbus even bothered to do a 900 other than money of course. I can't imagine that whale getting even longer.


From the airport with love
User currently offline2175301 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1074 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4078 times:

Consider also; that if they had decided to launch what is currently called the 900; they would have called that plane the 800 for marketing reasons. Thus, the A380-800 would have launched first anyway (and the current concept of the 1000 would be called the 900).

I doubt we will ever see the 900.

Have a great day,


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4800 posts, RR: 40
Reply 13, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4020 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Airbus made the right move with the A380 as she is today imho. They did overbuild some things, and still are untouchable as a CASM king. This overbuilding gives the airframe all the room it might possibly need for future growth. The only risk is they have taken is that things progressing over time so fast that part of what they overbuild/over-designed needs a redesign anyway before they will bring out the A380-900. I am convinced they will bring the A380-900 to the market in this decade, and it might also still have EIS this decade.  .

Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 5):
Don't forget that engine technology made significant improvements in the last few years. So we might see a new A380-900 with much more advanced engines than the current engines used in the 800. So maybe the 900 will have the same range as the current 800 (or at least comparable performance), which would not have been possible if the 900 had been launched already some years ago.

The new engines (hopefully Trent-XWB) will surely help a great deal. But don't forget that the option of a centre tank is also still a possibility. With that, the new engines, the benefits of the weight saving program which goes on as long as they build the A380, and further upcoming aerodynamic improvements, the A380-900 could imho easily have a better range then the current A380-800.  . A ULR-VLA?   .

[Edited 2011-11-06 09:35:50]

User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 14, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4020 times:

Quoting CXfirst (Reply 2):

These aren't the same people.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2757 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3595 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 6):
I'd love to be able to see the specs for an A388 that was designed to be an A388, and not an A389, or A380F

This is something I also thought about but I never considered it worth to start a separate thread: how much better would the A 388 be if they would have designed it as a pure A 388 or let's call it the A 380-800 NDFTA389 *)

1.) smaller wings, meaning shorter wings?
2.) shorter wings (if true) would enable some fancy winglets?
3.) "lighter" main landing gear? I suppose the number of wheels would be the same but the structural design would eventually lead to some significant weight savings?

In other words, wouldn't it make sense to think about an optimized A 388? Most probably there is no incentive for Airbus since the A 388 is already CASM-king.


---------------
*) Not Designed For The A 389


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 16, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3384 times:

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 15):
1.) smaller wings, meaning shorter wings?

I suspect they'd keep the span and shrink the chord...higher aspect ratio (all other things being equal) reduced induced drag.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 15):
2.) shorter wings (if true) would enable some fancy winglets?

You only do winglets if you have to..span increase is better. I think you're more likely to see raked tips like the A350/787/777.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 15):
3.) "lighter" main landing gear? I suppose the number of wheels would be the same but the structural design would eventually lead to some significant weight savings?

You could pull wheels out if the weight dropped enough but, for the same payload/range, you wouldn't need as much structure so you could bring MTOW (and fuel burn and landing fees and structure) down.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 15):
In other words, wouldn't it make sense to think about an optimized A 388?

It absolutely makes sense to think about it...but it doesn't make sense to do it, otherwise Airbus would have done it.

Tom.


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...
Which Airline Has Been Removed From The A380? posted Sun Aug 21 2011 12:53:20 by imag
When Will The A380-900 Be Rolled Out? posted Thu Feb 18 2010 05:32:44 by United Airline
How Did SQ Get The A380 First? posted Mon Sep 1 2008 03:47:42 by BAflyer
Air France : OK For The A380-900 posted Mon Jun 2 2008 14:18:21 by FCKC
Will Virgin Finally Get The A380? posted Fri Apr 27 2007 21:25:25 by LHStarAlliance
Should Airbus Put The A380 Style Interior On A330? posted Sun Apr 1 2007 15:15:03 by EI321
When Is AF Going To Get The A380? posted Mon Sep 11 2006 10:14:33 by Haggis79
A380: Could All The Mishaps Have Been Prevented? posted Wed Jul 26 2006 01:22:47 by LTU932
Focus: Lufthansa To Get PTVs On The A380 posted Sun Mar 19 2006 00:24:47 by TheSonntag
How Did A.netters Get On Board The A380? posted Wed Nov 30 2005 00:55:17 by CaptainTim