If you agree that short haul (plus slot-gaming) is the real congestion driver, then you've conceded the point:
If congestion is a matter of short haul ops then the A380 is not a solution unless and until shorthaul regularly demands 800+ seats/flight.
The world has a lot of airport congestion already but very little demand for A380's.
Airlines based at congested hubs like HKG, HND, and the entire US eschew the A380.
The congestion rationale for the A380 is a joke.
I don't get why this gets to such simplitic simplicismus rationale & somewhat off topic.
1. I for one never said the A380 was THE sole solution, but a solution amongst others
& deem Airbus has a point, obviously not one matching their wildest dreams. In a perfect information economy, all fairly efficient arframes have a role to play.
2. While bloated NBs & slot gaming to complicate matters, we are not talking of SHORT HAUL
traffic, but LONG-HAUL
, it is these that congest major international airports at peak hours, typically early morning & then again evenings. In fact some airports like ATL gave only one or two A380 gates, shunning whatever new comer. Most longhaul airline want to operate mornings or evernings, which are the preferred timings for both premium & cattle class Pax. Very few airlines have 4 landing/departure banks like EK - if at all.
Hope you see the economic pertinence of these two points.
Airport congestion is a matter of short-haul narrowbody ops;
there are dozens of solutions to that problem before you start flying A380's domestically.
For A380's to become the congestion solution, we'd need a fantastical level of traffic.
At that level it's cheaper to build new airports than to force everyone to fly a big, heavy VLA.
Laughable. Do you have any idea of what an airport costs at all ?
And the compounded building & running costs of all those you suggest be built ?
Do you have any idea of the cost to the environment & quality of life to neighbouring suburbs ?
Do you really think cities will embrace London's inefficient model of multiplying airports ?
Cities in Asia Pacific with multiple airports:
Osaka (3 - Kansai/ Itami/ Kobe)
PRD (Pearl River Delta - HK, Zhuhai/ CAN/ Macau/ Shenzhen all in a footprint smaller than LHR/LGW/STN/LTN)
Arguably Manila (CLK is closer to MNL than NRT is to TYO)
Beijing (opening 2019)
Sydney just announced will build one (2026 opening)
Frankly, it is only India that isn't building multiple airports - even though there has been discussion that BOM needs a second.
You are not serious, are you ? Seriously ?
How many airports does London have ? I've lost count. Five ? Six ?All the cities you mention have one or two, perhaps three at most. None wants to go for more than 3 that I know, usually 2 max.
THAT WAS MY POINT WITH LONDON : too many airports, inefficient on a global scale ( compared to DXB, DOH or the new Istanbul airport )
I grant you that the combined Guangzhou, Shenzen, Macau, HK, Zhuhai are comparable to the Greater London area, but then not quite, as each have a rather captive market, unlike London, but ok, let's consider it for discussion sake.
And you forgot the one major city that has already four & wishing to expand them : Moscow.
Last edited by DWC
on Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:21 am, edited 1 time in total.