LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 23502 posts, RR: 50 Posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 22557 times:
With weak sales, Airbus says is seeks to repositioning the A380 from a luxury flagship in the eyes of airlines to a high-density workhorse.
Airbus has begun pitching the aircraft in configurations as high as 558 passengers, and also can offer an additional 30 seats on top of that by introducing 11-seat abreast configuration.
Airbus is telling prospective buyers the denser layouts that would cut unit costs and lift margins, with such configurations working well in markets like intra-Asian routes, or trips between the Middle East and Indian subcontinent.
Great idea if you ask me. The A380 needs to viewed more as a general purpose "airbus" not a one off niche queen of the fleet toy for airlines.
roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9171 posts, RR: 52 Reply 1, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 22312 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter): Airbus is telling prospective buyers the denser layouts that would cut unit costs and lift margins, with such configurations working well in markets like intra-Asian routes, or trips between the Middle East and Indian subcontinent.
How close is India to opening up operations to allowing the A380?
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
KarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 6753 posts, RR: 26 Reply 2, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 22241 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter): Airbus has begun pitching the aircraft in configurations as high as 558 passengers, and also can offer an additional 30 seats on top of that by introducing 11-seat abreast configuration.
Airbus made optimizations to the cabin and now uses "slimline" seats which increases the seat count from 525 to 558. And 11-abreast should increase it further to 588 seats.
What I find curious is that Airbus don't force the airlines to offer configurations from 407 to 525.
And the comments about EK backing away from the 2-class A380 - I'm not convinced they're true. Last year Tim Clark said the delay was at the request of Airbus.
It's interesting that despite the "stupendous" CASM of 11-across, EK still think 10-across is a better solution for them.
I don't think that the biggest user's ambition is to walk away from the luxury image
"Short and patchy" seems an interesting representation of a backlog which (including Dorics 20 and LH's 2) is the equivalent of 6 years production at what seems to be the target rate of 30 per year.
What does that make the A330's 2 1/2 year backlog? Or the 777's 3 1/2 year?
Either way, I suppose it doesn't hurt for Airbus to emphasize the flexibility of the platform
jetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2454 posts, RR: 4 Reply 4, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 21862 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter): With weak sales, Airbus says is seeks to repositioning the A380 from a luxury flagship in the eyes of airlines to a high-density workhorse.
I think this kind of needed to happen at some point. Yeah the luxury status is cool and has clearly sold some planes, but luxury also comes with the idea of high cost, high maintenance, and high depreciation. The workhouse status should sell some airframes. But now the problem becomes who needs an airplane with 558 seats. I can't imagine there are a ton of routes that can sustain that amount of seats, especially on a daily basis.
I'm Here So It Worked-Every Pilot Who Made a Semi Unsafe Decision
TheRedBaron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2069 posts, RR: 6 Reply 6, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 21769 times:
If they want to sell the A380 as a high density aircraft, I think they should offer the lower deck on a 10 abreast config and the upper with a premium economy and a microscopic 18 to 24 business class, good for 600 to 630 pax.
A lot of people I know like the lower deck of the a380 not because the seats are big (they are not) but the Airplane doesnt feel claustrophobic, and because of the lower noise at cruise. A long flight on a Economy plus on the top deck at 30% premium I am sure will sell, maybe not at the beggining but later on people will think do I fly on a cramped a330 /777 or I pay a little more to fly more comfortable?
Then again I am just thinking people are not cheapos...and reality may prove me wrong...
Aesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 5722 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 21765 times:
To 11 abreast I say no. Clearly in that configuration they still have a deck almost entirely composed of first and business seats, that is pretty luxurious ! Have 6-8 F, 20-30 J (or 50 J no F), then you can have more than 600 Y without compromising on comfort.
[Edited 2013-07-25 12:18:57]
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
jetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2454 posts, RR: 4 Reply 8, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 21699 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 5): Those extra seats are coming almost "free", no problem if you can't fill them but more revenue if you can.
While I do understand that, in the current configuration there aren't a whole lot of routes where they can deploy the aircraft. I know EK makes it work (which blows my mind) along with LH and AF, but how many long haul routes really need 450 seats a day. Airlines will get them and view those seats as free, but they will probably end up discounting all the seats to fill the airplane. Not to mention if you are only filling those last 50 seats occasionally you are wasting money because of the additional F/A.
I'm Here So It Worked-Every Pilot Who Made a Semi Unsafe Decision
seabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4718 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 21680 times:
11Y is inevitable. Like the 747 in the early 1970s (which was 9Y at first), the A380 is currently a novelty that can draw a revenue premium. That won't last long, and when it ends, A380s will need to be 11Y in order to deal with internal competition from the A350-1000 and external competition from the 777-9X.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
3rdGen From Bahrain, joined Jul 2011, 208 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 21483 times:
I don't get it, why not just do ~650 Y seats, 325 upper and 325 lower, and create economy premium leg room and pitch and advertise the heck out of it. It would be the best economy product on the market. While everyone else is cramming seats in as tight as they get you'de be able to offer something unrivaled in terms of space and pitch for an Economy class. And at peak demand if the advertising is right and you can clearly show passengers that they are paying economy fares for something WAY better than any other airline, I would seriously not doubt that they could fill up a 380 daily out of most of the major destinations. And sure they might not have rights to the sub continent but they still have to transport the pax USA-DXB or EU-DXB, and that's the longer of the legs, that's the sector that counts.
lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11923 posts, RR: 100 Reply 11, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 21479 times:
When will we have a 2-class A380? IMHO, EK should go for a reduced premium (say 4 to 6 F, say 50J, and the rest Y) for their next A380. I've read just enough about a proposed new 777 configuration for EK with 4F, reduced J (but how many?) and the space utilized for Y. That makes sense IMHO. Just as a reduced premium A380 would make sense for them.
Quoting roseflyer (Reply 1): How close is India to opening up operations to allowing the A380?
They are not opening up airports to the A380 despite several being A380 ready or so close that the gates would be fixed before service would start. But India is not ready for the competition. They like the clause in their bilaterals "Nothing larger than a 747 or 400 seats."
Quoting astuteman (Reply 3): What does that make the A330's 2 1/2 year backlog? Or the 777's 3 1/2 year?
6 years is too long of a backlog for the A380. They must accelerate production to move units. For the A330, short leads times have helped sell planes. The same was true on the 777 (Boeing almost had to slow the line.) As to names, how about "Itchy and Scratchy?"
How much hubbing? LH, AF, KE, and EK/FZ do not plan to fill the planes on O&D. They plan to connect passengers. EK's goal is to feed a flight with ten passengers each from 20 cities.
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 9): the A380 is currently a novelty that can draw a revenue premium. That won't last long, and when it ends, A380s will need to be 11Y in order to deal with internal competition from the A350-1000 and external competition from the 777-9X.
Prost From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 431 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 21329 times:
Is this advertising really aimed at aircraft purchasers at airlines? I'd imagine if you were in the procurement department you'd be familiar with the capabilities of the A380 in different configurations.
J class seat pitch is completely unrealistic. Carriers have been moving away from 'angled-flat' seats for years.
Before anyone says anything, only AF and LH...those stalwarts of J class bleeding-edge comfort...so far have J seat pitches of 55 in. and 57-60 in. 'angled-flat' seats. The only other carriers with firm orders likely to use them are UN and BC, for a grand total of 39 frames out of 262. Maybe UU, if they take delivery , for 2 more frames.
What we probably will see, are A388s with say 6-8F/40-50J/~530Y for ~575 pax, or 40J/~600Y for ~640 pax, before 11-abreast.
seabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4718 posts, RR: 4 Reply 20, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 18563 times:
Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 19): My mother is in her seventies, and even she notices the difference between the 'awful' ten across 777 and the 'much nicer' A380. The everyday passenger appreciates the experience.
The question isn't whether she notices, it's whether she'd pay 10%+ more for a ticket.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3276 posts, RR: 4 Reply 24, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 16031 times:
Quoting astuteman (Reply 3): EK still think 10-across is a better solution for them.
Payload and standardization is 2 reasons. Having *some* room for cargo left is likely another. That said, shouldn't be that long before they break into a new batch of A380 and open up the possiblity for a new interior configuration without making Airbus cry (and present a large bill for services). I imagine that the low price EK gets is dependant on minimal if any configuration changes within each order.
25 MaverickM11: This sounds more like a last ditch effort than anything--why would carriers in this day and age look to buy a 'flagship', outside of a few obvious mi
26 NAV20: Have to agree - neither the A380 or the B748 are selling in any numbers worth talking about. I think also that 'increasing engine power' comes into i
27 Pellegrine: Yes I agree with you about the dollars, but this 'seat count game' has been going on at Airbus and Boeing for at least since the early 90s when the B
28 PHX787: Here's my thoughts given BC taking delivery of 350-seat A380s- 1) try to figure out how to use the space better, if I were Airbus. 2) Talk to EK about
29 KarelXWB: Agreed. The 525 3-class cabin configuration uses a more realistic J pitch, so if we remove the 8 extra J seats the total number should be 550 seats.
30 Unflug: In the middle seat you have 2 seats between you and the aisle, same as in many window seats. Exactly. I'm not advocating 11, just want to note that i
31 s5daw: 11 abreast?? That would put it on my no fly list :P
32 DUSint: But is this really true and necessary? To me, it seems logical that it would be enough they book a ticket with the airlines operating the A380 - ther
33 lhrnue: And that need to get pitched by Airbus ... the airlines can't work this out themselves?
34 EPA001: That can never hurt. And if it creates new sales, it is only a good thing. . Which is the concept behind the A380. Same here. The planes make money f
35 pa747sp: Removing F/J seats to fit more Y seats in isn't going to make the aircraft more profitable. Yields are higher in F/J. For most airlines the the equati
36 brilondon: How many routes would support a 558 seat aircraft year round that would justify the aircraft? Airbus is not in a position to force anything on its cu
37 fcogafa: Smacks of desperation on Airbus part, trying to reinvent the wheel to get sales. These layouts have been available all along and airlines have fitted
38 lapper: Surely the airlines know what the passenger certification is of the A380, it's up to them how they decide how to fit in what passengers they want to,
39 motorhussy: What I find amusing about this thread is that I would have titled it, 'Airbus to market the A380 for its flexibility' or somesuch. Others focus consis
40 NAV20: To be fair, motorhussy, they only sold nine of them last year, and none at all so far this year. Boeing are in similar case with the 748 (except for
41 Unflug: Assuming that the Doric MOU will not be firmed. I would not base my assumptions on that, if I wanted to be fair.
42 travelhound: It might be the case the higher density seating layouts now being proposed by Airbus only became viable with the introduction of the relatively new H
43 NAV20: I'm sure that Doric won't have to 'firm' them unless and until they've signed up lessees, Unflug. That's just 'Business - Lesson One'?
44 astuteman: That they want to differentiate their "luxury" A380's from their "cattle" 777's is clearly another And I don't see any customers asking for higher se
45 Unflug: I'm equally sure they haven't signed the MOU just for fun. Business lesson Two.
46 NeutronStar73: So much for all the talk from posters saying the A380 is a "prestige" aircraft. Airbus is (quite rightfully) doing the smart thing: Emphasize the plan
47 NAV20: Slice it any way you want, it's basically an option, not a binding commitment. Put it this way, Unflug. In the past six months or so, Boeing haven't
48 astuteman: You'll have to explain why my comment is laughable when you clearly agree with it. I think you lost something in the translation. Airbus clearly don'
49 NeutronStar73: I find that statement laughable, because of "what it states." I don't think I lost anything in translation unless you were being sarcastic! You and I
50 WesternDC6B: The 380 is, in coach, already a flying cattle-car as it is; that is hardly luxury. 31" pitch and 10 across, and soon 11 across is still 31" pitch and
51 seabosdca: The A380 has a huge advantage against current smaller widebodies in terms of operating cost per square meter of passenger floor space. That will be w
52 RGFC: In my opinion it is not a matter of being a luxury aircraft for passengers, which the A380 certainly isn't (at least in coach), but of being a luxury
53 WesternDC6B: Bingo! This is a 21st century replay of the airlines hopping on the 747 bandwagon. "We have one, too!" Look where it got them.
54 babybus: I'm not sure Airbus ever intended a luxury label to the A380. If it had, surely airlines would be charging a premium to fly it. As far as I'm aware, o
55 MaverickM11: I'm not sure how much an advantage that is turning out to be in practice--EK's 2012 op margin was a paltry 3%, and they have a lot more going for the
56 astuteman: I think you didn't catch it in the context it was intended. I found the comments of the article curious because Airbus don't force their customers to
57 seabosdca: EK is not making use of the A380's floor space advantage, because their 3-class A380 layout is quite a bit less dense than any of their 777 layouts. T
58 ScottB: The comment is laughable because it raises a ridiculous strawman: That the referenced article somehow implies that the various A380 operators chose t
59 fcogafa: And more pax means more baggage so less cargo space. The A380 is already very restricted on cargo capacity and this would only increase the problem. W
60 astuteman: Of course. Because I'd clearly want to advance that argument wouldn't i ... Ah well. I suppose I shouldn't expect better from an A380 thread
61 xlc: Both of these statements are dead on. Look who bought them: (1) up-and-coming airlines with inferiority complexes and (2) waning empires clinging to
62 Viscount724: Big difference is that cargo only moves one way. Almost all passengers travel round trip. It's common for routes that generate a lot of cargo revenue
63 Scipio: I think it is a misconception that airlines have to fill all their seats year-round. Airlines make a lot of money by having capacity available during
64 PlanesNTrains: I think some of this PR may very well be a way of positioning the A380 up-market a pinch to offer more of a CASM cushion with the coming twins. It ma
65 astuteman: I think that's exactly what it is Rgds
66 N62NA: Yes. And I had the misfortune of sitting in the middle of the 5 section once on a full UA flight ORD-SFO. I just buried my head in my hands for most
67 PlanesNTrains: Well.....this must be my lucky day. I am fortunate that all of my many DC10 rides were in the 70's to early 80's - all 2-4-2. My one 747 flight in th
68 curiousflyer: Nothing wrong with 11 abreast... as far as it is clear that it is a tight cabin. Just tell me in advance so I know not to book an economy flight with
69 NAV20: Plus, of course, what one could call the 'midsize twins,' 787s and A350s.
70 art: Won´t a need for higher density arrive naturally with traffic growth? If you fall short of selling all seats at a good price today, what about in 5 y
71 KarelXWB: The question is not "how many 558-seat routes are there" but it's about generating more revenue on existing routes. For example, if you have an 500-c
72 Viscount724: 10-abreast on the A380 lower deck (the upper deck is 8-abreast) is much better than 10-abreast on a 777. The A380 lower deck cabin is roughly 20 inch
73 N62NA: Or not. This worldwide recession (depression?) is into it's 5th year already.
74 RickNRoll: Look at the destinations. Australia seems to be made for the A380, for example, or Dubai or Heathrow.
75 Pellegrine: Look at who started the thread and whom the negative comments come from. If you read A380 threads going back months and years, the same names show up
76 PlanesNTrains: How is that different than any other A or B thread on here? Do you notice that the same people keep starting threads about 787 problems? Or that the
77 Pellegrine: It's not different. I just notice patterns. Re. the 787, most of the threads recently have been about factual events. A few years ago when most of th
78 PlanesNTrains: Fine, but Motorhussey was calling out the OP for mistitling it. Clearly that's not the case. Trust me - so do I. -Dave
79 NAV20: Reading the original article, apart from the first paragraph, it doesn't seem to be a matter of 'countering' any 'luxury image.' "The European planema
80 flyglobal: I simply believe Airbus is just preparing for the Boeing calaims in connection with the 777x launch this autum. While Beoing will use every chance to
81 art: True, recession has been here for years. Sweet spot size of new "replacement" aircraft is larger all the same (eg 787/A350) and forecasts of traffic
82 kanban: Over the years there have been threads that basically carry the theme, build it bigger, use a bigger plane, or add more seats and the passengers will
83 Ruscoe: What I find amazing is that Airbus has to do anything at all. Surely airline exec's can figure out what's best for them, and if any changes to the air
84 crj200faguy: Air Austral ordered 2 in 840 all economy configuration. I believe they have since cancelled that order.
85 brilondon: We will probably be seeing that once the economy gets better. Yes and that type of thinking will get you a ticket to the bankruptcy court. Exactly an