Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will LAX Be The First US Airport For A380 900?  
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3301 posts, RR: 2
Posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9856 times:

With LAX, supporting four A380's operators, and LAX is the third busiest airport in the nation,( beating the giant DFW, I love saying that) I wonder, could LAX be the the first US airport to accommodate the up coming A380 900?
Airbus recently said, that they plan on building the stretch A380 model by 2020, and LAX, JFK or even IAD, are likely to be the first US airports, that will welcome the giant jet. I feel that with it easy access to Asia and the South Pacific, LAX could easy be the first airport here in the States, to have an A380 900, land on it's runways.

37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFRAspotter From United States of America, joined May 2004, 2336 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9844 times:

Well until we actually see what airlines order it (EK is most likely a lock at this point to convert some existing -800 orders to -900 when or if the -900 is ever offered) I would imagine that JFK would see an EK -900 before LAX would IMO...

[Edited 2012-07-04 09:37:19]


"Drunks run stop signs. Stoners wait for them to turn green."
User currently offlinesolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 847 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9830 times:

Huh!

Do you know something about A389 we dont?

//Mike  



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 16937 posts, RR: 48
Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9808 times:

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
could LAX be the the first US airport to accommodate the up coming A380 900?

Sure. Why not. LAX and RDU.

Quoting solnabo (Reply 2):
Do you know something about A389 we dont?

   Is it even on offer yet privately? Given the slow sales of the 388 I'm not sure why Airbus would rush into another variant any time soon.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinecargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1251 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9734 times:

I would say that eventually both JFK and LAX will see A380-900 services if and when the airplane materializes, but I'd put JFK ahead of LAX in terms of when services begin if only because JFK is the largest gateway in all of North America.

As others have said, it will depend on who orders it, but EK is almost certain to do so, and given that they are now looking at two A388 frequencies a day at JFK...

For LAX, a larger, heavier variant of the A380 might have a range issue for LAX ops for EK, EY, QR, and SQ. We don't know that, of course, since we don't have any spec. Given their relatively modest presence there now, I can't see TG or MH bringing any potential A380 service to LAX. That leaves new customers or AF/LH/KE/BA for LAX A389 services when /if these carriers get the A389.


User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5552 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 9076 times:

Quoting cargolex (Reply 4):
For LAX, a larger, heavier variant of the A380 might have a range issue for LAX ops for EK, EY, QR, and SQ. We don't know that, of course, since we don't have any spec. Given their relatively modest presence there now, I can't see TG or MH bringing any potential A380 service to LAX. That leaves new customers or AF/LH/KE/BA for LAX A389 services when /if these carriers get the A389.

You seem to have forgotten the first A380 operator to LAX!
There is speculation (I stress it is speculation!) around that some of the deferred QF A380s may be delivered as among the first A389s. In which case LAX is a pretty safe bet for early service.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlinerotating14 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 542 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 8967 times:

Given the financial climate of the airline industry and with airlines partnering up, a stretch of an already ultra high capacity aircraft seems ..... like a stretch (pun intended). Like

a fellow poster said EK would be a strong candidate and possibly AF, KE, one or two more in Asia none in the America's and that's all I can think of. What would be the capacity of such a frame?


But back to the topic, I would assume a foreign ramp would be the first, CDG or LHR.


User currently offlinecipango From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 8871 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 3):
Sure. Why not. LAX and RDU.

Why RDU? Of all airports in the US..



Next Flights: DUB-BHX-DUB, DUB-BHX-DUB, DUB-LIS-DUB.
User currently offlinePC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2378 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 8767 times:

I'd say JFK is a better bet with Emirates. They've stated that they prefer the -900 over the -800 from the beginning. With their deep pockets, you can bet they'd get the first one.


Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
User currently offlinejohns624 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 865 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 8679 times:

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 6):
I would assume a foreign ramp would be the first, CDG or LHR.

The OP specifically said US airport.


User currently offlineFLALEFTY From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 396 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 8642 times:

Please educate me. Did I miss the launch of the A389? Is it actually in development? Who has ordered it? (I 'm guessing EK has an option clause for the type).

Don't get me wrong, I welcome its arrival, but have I missed some major order announcement?


User currently offlinesouthwest737500 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 8440 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 3):

Why is everyone talking about RDU. nothing is special about,


User currently offlineghifty From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 841 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 8428 times:

Quoting southwest737500 (Reply 11):

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 3):

Why is everyone talking about RDU. nothing is special about,

Sarcasm detected.. about as much chance of an A389 at LAX or RDU.. seeing as to how no A389 exists.



Fly Delta Jets
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3301 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 8358 times:

Airbus did say recently, that they plan on launching a stretch viraent of the A380.

User currently offlinespacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3517 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 8331 times:

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 13):
Airbus did say recently, that they plan on launching a stretch viraent of the A380.

And Boeing first proposed a stretch 747 in 1996.

Now, in 2012, we have the first commercial flights.

[Edited 2012-07-04 22:59:07]


I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlineghifty From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 841 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 8305 times:

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 13):

Airbus did say recently, that they plan on launching a stretch viraent of the A380.

It's still vapors. 787-10..



Fly Delta Jets
User currently onlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9836 posts, RR: 96
Reply 16, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 8249 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 14):
And Boeing first proposed a stretch 747 in 1996.

Now, in 2012, we have the first commercial flights.

Shouldn't be too long now to first flight then, seeing as the A380-900 was first proposed in 2000  

Seriously, I don't think you'll see it launched until c. 2015, by which time hopefully Airbus will have FINALLY worked out how to build them in decent numbers....

Rgds


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 17, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 8020 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 16):

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 14):
And Boeing first proposed a stretch 747 in 1996.

Now, in 2012, we have the first commercial flights.

Shouldn't be too long now to first flight then, seeing as the A380-900 was first proposed in 2000

Seriously, I don't think you'll see it launched until c. 2015, by which time hopefully Airbus will have FINALLY worked out how to build them in decent numbers....

Rgds

Interesting topic actually.

I was in Dubai last year and noted on their stands they have A389 markings for the nosewheel stops. Not reading anything into it of course but seems like a funny thing to do for a plane that according to many on here will never and should never be launched.

As has been noted many times – the A388 wing is optimized for a far higher weight than the A388 will ever get to. The aerodynamic twists and tweaks that Airbus have been writing into her suggests that far from being the finished article, there is more to come from this wing as well. People have talked about a new wingtip device as well.

What the debate has centred around is how big of a stretch would the A389 fuse be? The existing A388 is 72m LOA. Some say the A389 when she arrives will be 79m, 80m, 85m, or even 88m LOA. The 88m length appears a hard limit because of the impact anything longer would have on being able to park the thing at airports. The 747-8i is about 76m, for comparison’s sake. My gut feeling is that 88m is something that will happen later in the airframe’s life – we’re probably talking A3810 sort of territory, and not for at least 20 years. My guess would be a 10m stretch across two fuse plugs in front and behind the wing of about 10m, so 82m LOA all in.

Many have also suggested that a stretch is the “low hanging fruit” on the A380 development cycle, and they are correct – stretching it by 10m presents very few structural challenges comparatively speaking as the landing gear, internal structures, hydraulics, electrics, exits, certification and of course the wings were optimized and designed to make such a stretch possible very simply. It appears in large measure to simply be a case of building the plug and inserting it, although of course that’s very simplistic and it isn’t quite a simple as that. Even so, the issue is not “Will Airbus stretch the A388?” but “When will they stretch the A388 and for what reason?”

The answer is that they could do it tomorrow but there are a few reasons why it is smarter to wait. The main one of course is the production issues Airbus are still having. That precludes anything right now in my mind. Another one is the still-unstable global financial markets. Another one is that airlines are not keen to see their current (very expensive and not yet amortised) A380s replaced as the CASM kings on the routes they fly them on, and so inevitably the sales of the A388 as is would be impacted by the bigger bird. Much of the target group of customers that could use such a massive plane (and there are very few airlines in the world who could now or even in the next few years) already have A380s and financing is hard to get these days – and harder to get past the shareholders. Secondly stretching the A388 without re-engining to take advantage of the huge leaps in large turbofan technology that we’ve seen as a result of the 787 and A350 programmes would obsolete the big bird before she even flies, technologically speaking. It would still have unbeatable CASM, but range would suffer, and if airlines are going to spend another $250m a pop replacing an already head-and-shoulders-over-everything-else A380 with another one, they are going to want more bang for their buck.

I’ve always viewed the A388 today as an “A380-800A” – it is the 767-200 A model in developmental terms. “today’s” A389 would be the 767-300A – Airbus are (in my view) going to be sidestepping this and going from 767-200A straight to 767-200ER and 767-300ER – say, 2016 offering for a 2020 EIS.

This means re-engining the A380 with engines a further leap ahead from the GENX and Trent 1000XWBs we’re seeing now, perhaps with the same cores with further modernisations or perhaps with more radical changes, and in this sort of timeframe there is at least some scope to imagine that we may see a third, GTF offering as well possibly come to the table. It also means lightening of the structure in certain parts where possible, and also incorporating the tweaks and twists in the evolution of the wing. I’m absolutely sure there are people at Airbus studying ways of improving cargo efficiency/capacity as well.

With all this development work done, what you’d basically have – in very simplistic terms – is a baseline A380 with new engines, various avionics tweaks etc with or without the fuselage plugs, in much the same way the 767ER programme did. This means a second generation A380 available in two sizes – the A380-800R and the A380-900R.

A388R - would be able to do routes like DXB-LAX, MEX-DXB, DXB-AKL, LAX-HKG, SIN-EWR at full payload year round – the current tweaks on the existing A388 will eventually get it to this sort of range without re-engining but the A388R mods will allow the airframe to do the same mission but at a significantly reduced fuel burn.

A389R - would ideally have range roughly approaching what today’s A380 has now, (probably below the ULH pairs mentioned above though), ideally with roughly comparable fuel-burn but with a much higher payload.

Notwithstanding the reasons outlined above, Airbus are unlikely to jump into developing the A380 in any meaningful way, until it is sure it can achieve these hugely challenging targets. It is unlikely to be able to do this until the A350 is well in airline service so this gives us more of a hint into a potential timeline here. They will know where they are with the A350 variants by 2016/17 so I expect the A388R and 89R to be offered with achievable performance/payload numbers around this sort of time, with an EIS around, as I stated earlier, 2020 sort of time. By that time the first SQ birds will be 13 years old – so approaching their retirement in SQ service for resale.

Nobody on this site is claiming that all airlines need A380s, and that anyone who doesn’t have one will not be able to compete. The VLA or ULA market is modestly sized, and although it will grow, it seems unlikely we’ll ever see the same number of A380s as we have the smaller twins. We may in fact never see more than 8 or 900 built ever. What the A380 is designed for is the specific city-pair market and the current A380 is almost unchallenged in this sector. We’ve discussed the A380 business case ad nauseum on here so I wont go into it here, but it will suffice to say that I believe judging the programme on current market condition is myopic – deliberately I suspect for some. The programme is a long-term thing, and so too must the view on the market it is supposed to serve be. We may not see its true potential fulfilled for another 15 years. But we will see it. There is massive scope for improvements though and once Airbus have sorted out the production issues that have plagued the programme they are free to really test the design. We have not seen anything like what the airframe is capable of now and in the future.

Just my 2 cents.



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 offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4593 posts, RR: 38
Reply 18, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 7988 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 17):
We have not seen anything like what the airframe is capable of now and in the future

You are so right about that!  .

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 17):
Just my 2 cents

Well, I would value your post with a lot more then just two cents.   Thanks for this extensive post which I totally agree with.  .


User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1545 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 7983 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 17):
Just my 2 cents.

Looks like about 15 quids worth. Can't wait to see what specs airbus will announce.

Fred


User currently offlinehorstroad From Germany, joined Apr 2010, 226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 7965 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 17):
I was in Dubai last year and noted on their stands they have A389 markings for the nosewheel stops.

These markings are also in LH´s hangars at FRA. I'm looking forward to seeing it fly someday. a stretched version would look a bit more elegant, I think.



User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 7508 times:

I highly doubt QF will order any a389s any time soon, if at all. Given their current state and the fact that they recently deferred their remaining a388 orders, I don't think they are in the market for a bigger, more expensive aircraft at the moment.

User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5552 posts, RR: 6
Reply 22, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 5905 times:

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 21):
I highly doubt QF will order any a389s any time soon, if at all. Given their current state and the fact that they recently deferred their remaining a388 orders, I don't think they are in the market for a bigger, more expensive aircraft at the moment.

I agree, at the moment. However by 2018 when the A380s are now due they will (had better be!) a different airline and COULD possibly be an early A389 adopter.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 5853 times:

Quoting gemuser (Reply 22):
Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 21):
I highly doubt QF will order any a389s any time soon, if at all. Given their current state and the fact that they recently deferred their remaining a388 orders, I don't think they are in the market for a bigger, more expensive aircraft at the moment.

I agree, at the moment. However by 2018 when the A380s are now due they will (had better be!) a different airline and COULD possibly be an early A389 adopter.

Gemuser


Probably at that point they will place an order.


User currently offline2175301 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1022 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 5791 times:

Should Airbus actually produce the A380-9; my guess goes to Oshkosh as the first airport. Appearing at the EAA convention clearly has as good as chance - and better than many other options.

Have a great day,


25 odwyerpw : Oshkosh B'Gosh, wouldn't that be somthing.. No doubt some airlines want it... but would they stop ordering the A388 because it's not available? That
26 CHRISBA777ER : QF would be an early adopter for an A389R - no question. Anything that lowers CASM on their trunk long-haul routes is a no-brainer. I'd love to see h
27 johns624 : Through their FF program and with Skyteam being weak in Oz/NZ. It's the only game in town in the US if you want Skyteam miles.
28 SEPilot : Seeing as how airlines have been avoiding ordering new A388's in droves, and Airbus has more than plenty on its plate, and will for quite a few years
29 Post contains images Josh32121 : DL would compete by offering seats on a modern aircraft at a competitive price--just like QF does today on its 388's. From a passenger experience per
30 Post contains images astuteman : Do you know, I don't mind having a difference of opinion about the prospects of A380-900's cannibalising A380-800 sales - noyl time will tell. But th
31 dennys : Sorry but where did you see the Official future launching client of A389 ?
32 SEPilot : Hey, that's the fun of this forum. I do not dispute with anyone that the A380 has a lot of potential; it can be stretched, the engines can be improve
33 Post contains images astuteman : Better. These are sentient arguments i'm more than happy to engage in Rgds
34 SEPilot : I agree that these are solid, factual issues that can be debated. However, there are many that feel that when Airbus committed to building the A380 i
35 CHRISBA777ER : As you know very well - i was referring to CASM. Am struggling to imagine how DL will be able to stay with QF in terms of ticket price they offer onc
36 Post contains images lightsaber : Who else would be the launch customer? Ahhh... No hint to the length of the A389! IMHO, the length will be determined by the range requirement. 85m w
37 wah64d : Budvar-Crazy at it again? I wouldn't pay too much attention to anything he says. He's a bit like a spoiled child, nothing to say and saying it far to
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...
Will SIA Be The First To Operate The A380? posted Tue Jun 19 2001 18:28:04 by Airbus A380
Will There Be Any New US Customer For The B 747? posted Sun Dec 24 2000 07:27:23 by United Airline
Could LRU Be The Next NM Airport For AA/AE? posted Sun Jan 24 2010 13:09:50 by 1337Delta764
Will DL Be The Only US Carrier To IST? posted Fri Jul 14 2006 17:57:56 by Gokmengs
VVO To Be First Russian Airport For 'Open Skies' posted Mon Feb 13 2012 07:42:16 by bjorn14
Who Will Be The First Major Airlines To RVR posted Fri Dec 2 2011 11:57:30 by wepaman
United Labor Issue Will They Be The DL Or US Way? posted Sat Nov 20 2010 19:53:21 by NYCAdvantage
Which NW DC-10s Will Be The First Retired? posted Sat Sep 4 2004 10:34:11 by N229NW
Who Will Be The 1st US Airline To Order The 7e7 posted Mon Jul 12 2004 20:31:31 by Njdevilsin03
Wich Big LCC Will Be The First To Bancrupt? posted Tue Mar 9 2004 14:15:39 by QIguy24