CHRISBA777ER
Topic Author
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:37 pm

Joke for you.

An elderly Aussie man lay very sick in his bed. While suffering the agonies of
sickness, he suddenly smelled the aroma of his favourite
biscuits wafting up the stairs. He gathered his remaining strength, and
lifted himself from the bed.
Leaning on the wall, he slowly made his way out of the bedroom, and
with even greater effort, gripping the railing with both hands, he
crawled downstairs. With laboured breath, he leaned against the
door-frame, gazing into his homely Aussie kitchen.
Were it not for the pain, he would have thought himself already
in heaven, for there, spread out upon waxed paper on the kitchen
table were literally hundreds of his favourite biscuits.
Was it heaven? Or was it one final act of love from his devoted
Aussie wife of sixty years?

Mustering one great final effort, he threw himself towards the table,
landing on his knees in crumpled posture. His aged and withered hand
trembled towards a biscuit at the edge of the table, when it was
suddenly smacked by his wife with a spatula.............

"F**k off" she said, "they're for the funeral."

------------------------------------------------------

The A380 is very much still a viable aircraft. Why is everyone writing it off?

The delays are longer than anyone expected, but does a one year EIS delay mean the finished aircraft is suddenly unviable?

Question for you.

Whats worse?

A immature platform is brought to market and key customers buy initial examples and find them to be unsuitable.

A matured platform is brought to market with many of the key EIS bugs ironed out, but over a year late (although the delay has been handsomely compensated)?

Its pretty obvious I'd say.

Look to the future - the A380 wing was designed for a larger aircraft, and with GENX and new gen bleedless engines being rolled out for the Dreamliner and A350XWB, a re-engining looks likely. I think only then will we see the really true potential of the A380, so why have you all written it off?

I've read Richard Aboulafia's piece in the Morgan Stanley A380 debate and he sounds like a typical A-net Boeing cheerleader - obsessed with "platform XXX is better than platform XXX" rhetoric - I feel he takes a somewhat short term view on things, and grossly underestimates the FUTURE market for a VLA.

The A380 is not dead folks, so lets not be arranging the funeral yet please.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
cobra27
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:57 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:07 pm

Thank God for this topic. I thought it was really dead. Woow what a surprise.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:15 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
I've read Richard Aboulafia's piece in the Morgan Stanley A380 debate and he sounds like a typical A-net Boeing cheerleader - obsessed with "platform XXX is better than platform XXX" rhetoric - I feel he takes a somewhat short term view on things, and grossly underestimates the FUTURE market for a VLA.

And yet he still predicts EADS being both profitable, cash-generating, and debt-reducing during all of the next 10 years, despite the "pessimistic" A380 message..  eyepopping 

Heaven help us if he was an A380 optimist  Smile

Regards
 
CHRISBA777ER
Topic Author
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:22 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 2):

I think his optimism is based on the A350XWB - he sure does love his big twins doesnt he?
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2788
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:23 pm

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 4):
Put a B infront of 380 and everything is hunky dory, with an A infront "it´s a stillborn/never gonna fly etc. etc."

Am I right or am I right?

Face it, the 380 is now the most delayed airliner in the entire history of jet powered civil aviation. This is not an A vs B thing.

I have read this board for years, and the bottom line is that people defend the 380 by attacking the people who said "it will never fly" who were few in number, but the real argument, the one that proved to be true, is that it the business plan was flawed. Airbus ceded a lucrative large market for a niche market and bragging rights.

To make it worse, the project management/change control effort was severely lacking, and customer relations were handled very badly.

I think it is time for the A-only fans to address the REAL criticism that has proved to be prophetic, and stop pointing to the "it will never fly" straw man provided by teenagers without a clue.
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2454
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:24 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
The A380 is very much still a viable aircraft. Why is everyone writing it off?

Those are just a bunk off hard-core 747-8 fans desperate to get their aircraft in the air...
The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
 
NASCARAirforce
Posts: 2452
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:28 pm

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 6):
Face it, the 380 is now the most delayed airliner in the entire history of jet powered civil aviation. This is not an A vs B thing.

More delayed than the L-1011?

Think positive. How many airports in the world are truely A-380 ready yet? The delay now gives these airports a chance to get A-380 ready.
 
NYC777
Posts: 5065
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:39 pm

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 4):
Put a B infront of 380 and everything is hunky dory, with an A infront "it´s a stillborn/never gonna fly etc. etc."

Am I right or am I right?

Instead of turning this into another A vs B war as you are apt to do, why don't you add something constructive to the discussion. That would be a refreshing change for you Solnabo.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:43 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
I've read Richard Aboulafia's piece in the Morgan Stanley A380 debate and he sounds like a typical A-net Boeing cheerleader - obsessed with "platform XXX is better than platform XXX"

Indeed i readed also this debate and couldnt agree more. BTW great post!
 thumbsup 

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
The A380 is not dead folks, so lets not be arranging the funeral yet please

A lot of A.Netters and "aviation enthusiasts" would like to see it dead, forgetting how much firms in the whole world are included in this program.
IMO both the 747 and the A380 are marvel of engeneering wich deserve their merit.

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 6):
Face it, the 380 is now the most delayed airliner in the entire history of jet powered civil aviation.

Its also the biggest project in the entire history of civil aviation and yes even bigger then the 747.(sure its not a excuse but one should mind  Wink )

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 6):
I think it is time for the A-only fans to address the REAL criticism that has proved to be prophetic, and stop pointing to the "it will never fly" straw man provided by teenagers without a clue.

Couldnt agree more, Airbus Management did a very bad job, a shame. banghead 
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
SeeTheWorld
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:46 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:45 pm

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 4):
Put a B infront of 380 and everything is hunky dory, with an A infront "it´s a stillborn/never gonna fly etc. etc."

Am I right or am I right?

No, you are not right. The fact is, the management of the A380 project and communication regarding its issues have been an absolute failure, which unfortunately is going to have negative affect Airbus' for many years (in distractions and economics). Whether the A380 was the right or wrong size aircraft is not the issue anymore. This is not A vs. B - this a collosal management fiasco for Airbus.

Quoting Bmacleod (Reply 7):
Those are just a bunk off hard-core 747-8 fans desperate to get their aircraft in the air...

Speaking of desparate. That's a desparate argument and it's delusional. I'm a fan of all aircraft, and I hate to see serious issues like what Airbus is facing currently, but the A380 situation is serious and it's real, regardless of the viability of the aircraft. The A380 will most likely fly for many decades, but it is clear that the Airbus problems associated with this aircraft and the distractions and resources that have gone to try and fix the problems are enormous. The most distressing part is that it isn't clear whether they are close to solving the overall problem with the aircraft or the management structure at Airbus.
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2788
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:49 pm

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 8):
More delayed than the L-1011?

Yes, as of this month.

Quoting Bmacleod (Reply 7):
Those are just a bunk off hard-core 747-8 fans desperate to get their aircraft in the air...

Desperate? Boeing does not need even half the engineers to produce the 748 as Airbus needs to produce the 380. The 748 project has required just a few hundred engineers, compared to thousands for the 380.

Apples and oranges.

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 8):
Think positive. How many airports in the world are truely A-380 ready yet? The delay now gives these airports a chance to get A-380 ready.

I have never been able to think positive about the core business plan of the 380, and the project management has been amateurish at best. I am a fan of ALL aviation, and I will go out of my way just to see one on the ground dont get me wrong, but damn what a clusterf#$%! We are getting near Spruce Goose territory here.
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:50 pm

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 8):
More delayed than the L-1011?

In short, yes.

The maiden flight of A380 was on April 27, 2005. On or about Sunday, September 17, 2006, the A380 program surpassed the L1011's previous record of approximately 508 days (16 Nov 70 - 6 Apr 72) between maiden flight of the first test aircraft and delivery of the first production aircraft to a customer. Nevertheless, Lockheed went on to deliver approximately 17 L1011s during the remainder of 1972. Prior to the delay acknowledged last week, Airbus would not have delivered a cumulative total of 17 A380s until sometime in early 2008.
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:59 pm

The WhaleJet isn't dead, but it is moribund in my opinion.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
The delays are longer than anyone expected, but does a one year EIS delay mean the finished aircraft is suddenly unviable?

The WhaleJet was already delayed more than a year (2 months + 6 months + 7 months) before the recently announced unspecified fourth delay. I believed the WhaleJet was unviable (in terms of returning a profit on the investment) before the first delay. I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that the WhaleJet is unviable in terms of being able to carry passengers and cargo. I don't think anyone is even arguing that there are no routes on which an airline can make money with it, though there is great disagreement over how many such routes exist.
 
CHRISBA777ER
Topic Author
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:08 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 14):
The WhaleJet isn't dead, but it is moribund in my opinion

Youve thought that from day one Zvezda.

Let me ask you a question.

Fast forward two years - EK, SQ, QF, and Etihad have all recieved their first A380s.

How do you think it will perform for them?
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 avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13761
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:27 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 14):
I believed the WhaleJet was unviable (in terms of returning a profit on the investment) before the first delay.

 checkmark 

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
Look to the future - the A380 wing was designed for a larger aircraft, and with GENX and new gen bleedless engines being rolled out for the Dreamliner and A350XWB, a re-engining looks likely. I think only then will we see the really true potential of the A380, so why have you all written it off?

A re-engine program will mean tinkering with the pylons, engine interfaces, software, etc. and will need certification. That will add up to some non-trivial engineering time and costs, at the same time Airbus will be looking for engineers and euros for the A350XWB. It will also push out the A380's break even point. Also I wonder if PW/GE and RR will go for it: they probably haven't recovered the initial investment in the current generation engines.

If we're looking for good news, the A380F doesn't have an IFE, so they should be able to ship those on time, hopefully!  Smile
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
Dtw757
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:05 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:31 pm

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 6):
Face it, the 380 is now the most delayed airliner in the entire history of jet powered civil aviation.

What about The Concorde which made it's first flight on March 2, 1969 and never entered service until January 21, 1976?
721,2,732,3,4,5,G,8,9,741,2,3,4,752,3,762,3,4,772,3,788,D93,5,M80,D10,M11,L10,100,AB6,319,20,21,332,3,346,388,146,CR2,7,
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2454
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:40 pm

Quoting DTW757 (Reply 17):
What about The Concorde which made it's first flight on March 2, 1969 and never entered service until January 21, 1976?

Different class of aircraft entirely. Supersonic speed and sonic boom complaints are factors having nothing to do with the A380 or the 747...
The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
 
scouseflyer
Posts: 2165
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:02 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:41 pm

Quoting DTW757 (Reply 17):
What about The Concorde which made it's first flight on March 2, 1969 and never entered service until January 21, 1976?

Good call - the Concordes also have to have the bigest loss on of cost of plane against sale price the BA ones were sold for £1 a copy!
 
access-air
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2000 5:30 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:47 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 13):
The maiden flight of A380 was on April 27, 2005. On or about Sunday, September 17, 2006, the A380 program surpassed the L1011's previous record of approximately 508 days (16 Nov 70 - 6 Apr 72) between maiden flight of the first test aircraft and delivery of the first production aircraft to a customer. Nevertheless, Lockheed went on to deliver approximately 17 L1011s during the remainder of 1972.

Wasnt the delay with the L1011 due to a strike at Rolls Royce? That would hardly be the fault of Lockheed.
However, I think that had the L1011 had been offered with Pratts or GE's there mightnot have been such a long delay....Am I correct???

Access-Air
Remember, Wherever you go, there you are!!!!
 
Dtw757
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:05 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:48 pm

Quoting Bmacleod (Reply 18):
Different class of aircraft entirely. Supersonic speed and sonic boom complaints are factors having nothing to do with the A380 or the 747...

The claim was that the A380 is now the most delayed aircraft in the entire history of jet powered civil aviation, a category in which the Concorde would fit into being supersonic or not.
721,2,732,3,4,5,G,8,9,741,2,3,4,752,3,762,3,4,772,3,788,D93,5,M80,D10,M11,L10,100,AB6,319,20,21,332,3,346,388,146,CR2,7,
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:52 pm

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 19):
Good call - the Concordes also have to have the bigest loss on of cost of plane against sale price the BA ones were sold for £1 a copy!

No, they werent.

Its a rather annoying urban legend thats just false. BA got their original fleet for list price, and the extra planes for a lot more than £1 each.

[Edited 2006-09-25 16:53:06]
 
David L
Posts: 8547
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:57 pm

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 19):
the BA ones were sold for £1 a copy!

They ordered 5 and paid more than the price of a 747 for each of those. They got 2 unsold models for £1 each. This information appears in just about every thread where Concorde is mentioned.

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 19):
the Concordes also have to have the bigest loss on of cost of plane against sale price

What about the B2707?  Smile

But it's true, supersonic transport was a different kettle of fish.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:03 am

Quoting David L (Reply 23):
They ordered 5 and paid more than the price of a 747 for each of those. They got 2 unsold models for £1 each. This information appears in just about every thread where Concorde is mentioned.

Actually they paid list for 5, £1400 for another basic airframe and engines with no flight equipment or cabin, and the cost of a sale or return loan for the last airframe, which was absorbed by BA over a number of years so its not known what exactly they paid for that airframe.

BA didnt order the last two, they were dropped options from other airlines.
 
incitatus
Posts: 2691
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:03 am

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
Look to the future - the A380 wing was designed for a larger aircraft,

What an excellent point! Now let's look at how larger that yet-to-be-launched version must be and how large the market for it will be. And how much money it takes to develop the A380 program further. Possibly the demand for the A380 size plane is 15 years away and for being so soon Airbus will never make a dime off of it.

Quoting Bmacleod (Reply 7):
Those are just a bunk off hard-core 747-8 fans desperate to get their aircraft in the air...

Not all of us are in that category. Airplanes are not soap and Airbus was driven like it was Procter & Gamble. Airbus makes some good products but deserves no break.
Stop pop up ads
 
bnamaxx
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:34 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:08 am

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 8):
Think positive. How many airports in the world are truely A-380 ready yet? The delay now gives these airports a chance to get A-380 ready.

Right! If I'm an airport manager, I'm going to say "Oh great! This bird is delayed again. NOW we can spend that $500 million to add a couple of double decker gates and pour more concrete. Of course we will never see the thing fly here, but at least we can put 'A380 Ready' on our website!"

I don't see ATL or ORD rushing to make any announcements since all these delays. It seems kind of hollow that the world's two busiest airports have no plans to accomodate this albatross doesn't it?
 
CHRISBA777ER
Topic Author
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:09 am

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 25):
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
Look to the future - the A380 wing was designed for a larger aircraft,

What an excellent point! Now let's look at how larger that yet-to-be-launched version must be and how large the market for it will be. And how much money it takes to develop the A380 program further. Possibly the demand for the A380 size plane is 15 years away and for being so soon Airbus will never make a dime off of it.

Yes but in 15 yrs the A388 will be a fully-matured and widely utilised type - we will know then how the VLA market segment is shaping up.

I would respectfully contend that China alone could keep the A380 in business until its replacement comes about. Some of you mahy not feel this is accurate at present but i guarantee you'll think differently in 15 yrs.
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 avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22953
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:10 am

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
The A380 is very much still a viable aircraft. Why is everyone writing it off?

Eddie Valiant said it best in Who Framed Roger Rabbit - "Everybody needs a hobby."  Smile

Still, a number of people (but by no means "everyone") just look at the immediate term, be it in regards to the A380, the 748, the 787, or the A350. And that colors their perceptions because the success or failure of none of these projects will be judged in the short term.

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 4):
Put a B infront of 380 and everything is hunky dory, with an A infront "it´s a stillborn/never gonna fly etc. etc."

And if the 787 had an A in front of it, many folks would note "it's revolutionary; it's a game-changer; it's the future; it will dominate it's market". Yet because it has a B in front of it, those folks say "it's as fragile as Styrofoam; it can't be repaired so every ding will require the airframe to be scrapped; it can't possibly be built on schedule because if A couldn't do it, how could B?"

Both sides are full of...hyperbole...at times.
 
David L
Posts: 8547
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:12 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 24):
Actually they paid list for 5, £1400 for another basic airframe and engines with no flight equipment or cabin, and the cost of a sale or return loan for the last airframe, which was absorbed by BA over a number of years so its not known what exactly they paid for that airframe.

You're right, of course. I just get tired when the same old myth keeps coming up - I was focussing on the "full price for the ones they ordered" business. You're more patient than I am.  Smile

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 24):

BA didnt order the last two, they were dropped options from other airlines

Agreed:

Quoting David L (Reply 23):
They got 2 unsold models

 Smile
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:16 am

Quoting David L (Reply 29):
You're more patient than I am.

Nah, Im just at work  Smile
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22953
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:21 am

Quoting David L (Reply 23):
What about the B2707?  Smile

The plane was never sold (though it was ordered - not sure if monies actually changed hands, however), so it doesn't count.  Smile
 
David L
Posts: 8547
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:30 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 31):
The plane was never sold (though it was ordered - not sure if monies actually changed hands, however), so it doesn't count.

Hmm... s'pose.  Smile
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:55 am

Airbus needs to start worrying about it's survival from all of these problems. In business, there is one worry that transcends all industries and sizes. Cash flow, cash flow and once again cash flow. Not one of the Airbus apologists can tell me that this is not a major concern!
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:08 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 2):
And yet he still predicts EADS being both profitable, cash-generating, and debt-reducing during all of the next 10 years, despite the "pessimistic" A380 message

The analysis was by Morgan Stanley, not Richard Aboulafia. Mr. Aboulafia provided his views on the A380 and that's all. Morgan Stanley, a company that has yet to fully answer for its role in the Enron fiasco, is in the business of selling stock. I would very much like to read a range of similar Morgan Stanley papers before accepting them as an unbiased source. They certainly do not stand on reputation alone, IMHO.

The Morgan Stanley paper was produced before the latest round of A380 delay, the magnitude of which we do not yet know. It also focused solely on the A380, which as any A.Netter knows is far from the sole determining factor for the future financial health of Airbus.

Using that data is questionable - but you are entitled to it.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 25):
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
Look to the future - the A380 wing was designed for a larger aircraft,

What an excellent point! Now let's look at how larger that yet-to-be-launched version must be and how large the market for it will be. And how much money it takes to develop the A380 program further. Possibly the demand for the A380 size plane is 15 years away and for being so soon Airbus will never make a dime off of it.

Yes indeed, look to the future. If the VLA market develops in future, Boeing would build an airplane. The A380's competition would utilitize materials and technologies available at that time...do you suppose that it would be competitive against an all-composite Boeing behemoth? I think it would not be, but I also think it doesn't matter - it's not gonna happen.
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
airfrnt
Posts: 1993
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:05 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:14 am

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):

Look to the future - the A380 wing was designed for a larger aircraft, and with GENX and new gen bleedless engines being rolled out for the Dreamliner and A350XWB, a re-engining looks likely. I think only then will we see the really true potential of the A380, so why have you all written it off?

I've read Richard Aboulafia's piece in the Morgan Stanley A380 debate and he sounds like a typical A-net Boeing cheerleader - obsessed with "platform XXX is better than platform XXX" rhetoric - I feel he takes a somewhat short term view on things, and grossly underestimates the FUTURE market for a VLA.

Chris,

What you basically are saying here (and indeed the entire A380 program is based on the thought that) "Ignore the statistics and the trends, turn the clock back 20 years".

If the A380 had been introduced in the 80s against the 744, it would have done fantastic. But look at what happened when McDonnel tried to introduce the MD-12 after the 767 and 757 were introduced. There was not enough interest in a plane that very much looked to be the genesis of the the 380. Look at what happened when Boeing tried to introduce the 747-5/6/X. No takers. For that matter, look at how hard Airbus has struggled for every single order, and bear in mind that even if they hit their 20 a year target sales, they will still fall well short of their initial promises to investors.

You feel that Richard takes a short term view on the 380, but there are no statistics in terms of overall market traffic with VLA, even in the most congested transatlantic routes that justifies the obscene investment and risk Airbus has with the A380.

My main objection to the A380 revolves completely around your feelings versus actual statistical facts. The A380 is a plane that makes Europe feel good. Beyond that, The A380 has a very small niche market. Expanding the plane just gives it another, smaller, niche market.


Quoting Solnabo (Reply 4):
Put a B infront of 380 and everything is hunky dory, with an A infront "it´s a stillborn/never gonna fly etc. etc."

With all due respect sir, that is crap. Most of the people that I see (including myself) objecting to the A380 also object to the 748i and see it for what it truely is (a 2 billion dollar effort by Boeing to make sure that Airbus looses 7 billion). The 748i may make more business sense from that point of view then the A380. Airbus repeated over and over when they were launching the A3XX that the 744 was Boeing's breadbasket. However, a honest sober look in the late 90s would have revealed that Boeing had moved on with the 777 taking that crown.

Airbus read their competition wrong and read the market wrong. The A380 may be the most perfectly imagined and implemented airplane ever (and the delays and problems launching this plane indiciate otherwise) but it will still fail simply because the business justification failed.

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 8):

More delayed than the L-1011?

The parrallell's between the two programs are striking. Both have the market completly wrong. Both are very elegant planes. Both are going to loose their respective manufacturor a lot of money.
 
mowtoib
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:50 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:22 am

Oh guys... Aren't you tired of saying all this over and over again?  Wink
 
Shenzhen
Posts: 1664
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 12:11 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:29 am

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
A immature platform is brought to market and key customers buy initial examples and find them to be unsuitable.

A matured platform is brought to market with many of the key EIS bugs ironed out, but over a year late (although the delay has been handsomely compensated)?

What makes anyone think that it is either one or the other, just because it is delayed a couple years.

My gut says the airlines will receive an airplane that will be inmature and two years late. You simply can't have the type of rework that has been going on in the wiring and not have problems.

How many wires have been knicked when stringing new wires in the same bundle. How many new faults will be written into the software when trying to fix other problems through the poor integrration of the systems.

With these significant delays, I think I would not want to be on the A380 introduction team, unless I was worried about redundancies.

Cheers
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:29 am

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
I feel he takes a somewhat short term view on things, and grossly underestimates the FUTURE market for a VLA.

The future? More than likely somewhere between small and completely crappy.

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 10):
Its also the biggest project in the entire history of civil aviation and yes even bigger then the 747

Sure, the size of the a/c is bigger than the 747, noone would argue that. But the biggest project in history? I'd say the 747, which was developed without the use of modern computers and technology was a monster of a program. And if you convert 1970 dollars to today it cost about 1/3 of the A380 to develop.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 15):
Fast forward two years - EK, SQ, QF, and Etihad have all recieved their first A380s.

How do you think it will perform for them?

2 years? That's what the estimate is for all these airlines now? I honestly think the airport pairs the A380 can be sent to and filled with pax is very limited and the a/c will not be seen at many large airports and be assigned religiously on the biggest routes only. Now, if these airlines truly have enough routes to fill this bird year round is yet to be seen. It's not like you can just reschedule the A380 very easily, the airport has to be "A380 approved."

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 27):
Yes but in 15 yrs the A388 will be a fully-matured and widely utilised type - we will know then how the VLA market segment is shaping up.

Widely utilized? I doubt it. The airlines who have already ordered it will probably be flying it, maybe a few of the smaller orders will be sold or leased out when airlines figure out operating just a few of these birds is cost prohibative. How the VLA market shapes up? Both A & B have said it's a small market. I don't think people want to fly between major hubs anymore and have to connect 1, 2, or 3 times before their destination. People want direct flights to save time and $$$ and get to the destination, thats where a majority of long haul flying will be in 20 years IMO.
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:40 am

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 15):
Youve thought that from day one Zvezda.

Well, not from day one, but since the Dead Sea was ill.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 15):
Fast forward two years - EK, SQ, QF, and Etihad have all recieved their first A380s.

How do you think it will perform for them?

Perform in what sense? Technically or financially? Technically, I expect the WhaleJet to be able to operate the subset of JumboJet routes that have a WhaleJet compatible airport at both ends. Financially, I expect SQ, QF, and EK to face difficult choices between loads and yields.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 27):
I would respectfully contend that China alone could keep the A380 in business until its replacement comes about.

In my opinion, the suggestion that the WhaleJet will be operating on routes not presently served by the JumboJet is fanciful. For the last twenty years, the trend has been toward smaller airliners. There is no reason to expect a reversal of that. I expect the trend to smaller airliners to accelerate due to the A350 and B787 having CASM similar to that of the WhaleJet and the B747-8 SuperJumbo.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
Both sides are full of...hyperbole...at times.

 checkmark 
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22953
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:00 am

For the record, I'm not against the A380, nor do I feel it's some huge mistake doomed to crush Airbus. So the following comments and observations are not made to "bash the A380":

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
Whats worse? A immature platform is brought to market and key customers buy initial examples and find them to be unsuitable. A matured platform is brought to market with many of the key EIS bugs ironed out, but over a year late (although the delay has been handsomely compensated)?

I'd argue the latter. The 748I, while it can't perform every mission the A380 can, can perform darn near most of them. And it's a completely matured platform with a forty-year history of success behind it. Yet it has only sold one frame.

The A380 is a platform with no prior baseline created by a company with no prior experience in building anything of this magnitude (though with their own solid track-record). Yet it's sold over 150 frames.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Thread starter):
Look to the future - the A380 wing was designed for a larger aircraft, and with GENX and new gen bleedless engines being rolled out for the Dreamliner and A350XWB, a re-engining looks likely. I think only then will we see the really true potential of the A380, so why have you all written it off?

Perusing the A380 has definite "opportunity costs" for Airbus, and it remains to be seen how those costs affect Airbus in the long term while they wait for the market to evolve to the point it embraces the A380. And this assumes the market will do so, for both Boeing and Airbus have been working against just such a market. The A330/A340/767/777 programs all helped open new routes, connecting cities either directly (bypassing the hubs) or via one hub connection instead of two. And now the 787 and A350 programs make that even easier and more practical, by lowering the "barriers of entry" thanks to superior economics.

Airbus' focus on the A380 allowed Boeing to attack them where they were both weak (the A340 using the 777) and now strong (the A330 using the 787). That focus prevented Airbus from responding effectively to either attack at first (A340E/A350 Mk. I). Now Airbus is shoring up the A340 with the A350XWB, but will allow Boeing years to continue to sell 777s as well as time to develop larger variants of the 787. And they are considering improving the A330, but the 787 will still outperform it and will enjoy years of advance sales, closing the "window of sales opportunity" for such an enhanced model.

And both the A330NG and A350XWB require resources - financial and physical - that are currently working on the A380 and will, in part, be financed with revenues from the A380 going forward. Yet if Airbus has to wait years for the market to mature enough to bring deliveries to maximum, the pool of available revenue from the project will be limited, requiring Airbus to pursue external sources (and I am not referring to additional Launch/Government Aid here) from the open market at prices higher then they may have planned for.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 27):
Yes but in 15 yrs the A388 will be a fully-matured and widely utilised type - we will know then how the VLA market segment is shaping up.

Absolutely the hubs will always be there. And absolutely hubs will connect with hubs. Therefore, there will always be a need for the A388 and larger variants. Yet those of us who question (not bash, not dismiss, not vilify) the A380's long-term prospects feel that it is more likely that when the hubs reach capacity, traffic will start to bypass them. When JFK-LHR is maxed-out on each end, you'll see LGA-LGW and PHL-STN. We don't believe traffic will continue to flow exclusively between JFK and LHR, using first 744s, then A388s, then A389s, then finally A38Gs.

Quote:
I would respectfully contend that China alone could keep the A380 in business until its replacement comes about. Some of you mahy not feel this is accurate at present but i guarantee you'll think differently in 15 yrs.

Maybe. Maybe not. For international use, it might be. But for domestic, I think the 787-3 and narrowbodies will drive that demand. And while China right now only has a handful of international "hub" airports which bodes well for the A380 family due to traffic and slot considerations, the 787 and A350 could open many more airports to international services - airports that a 747/777/A380 couldn't easily serve so were never exploited.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:01 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 39):
For the last twenty years, the trend has been toward smaller airliners. There is no reason to expect a reversal of that.

And yet the 777 still sold fantastically well, the 747 managed to support another entire iteration very successfully, the A330 flourished and Boeing is planning the 747-8.

Yes, the forecast certainly looks gloomy.

While the market has indeed started purchasing more midsized and single aisle aircraft, I think the view that theres a specific trend to smaller airliners which is going to damage the larger aircraft markets is essentially a fallacy.
 
madairdrie
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:40 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:14 am

IMO both the A and B theories of the future are correct. What we have to remember is that more and more people are flying and more frequently every day. So therefore there will be more oppertunities for direct city pair flights and as long as price is right people will fly direct if they can. So therefore the 787 and 350 will prove right for these routes.

However I will never be able to get direct flights from Glasgow or Edinburgh to exactly where I want to go in the world. I know we are getting more and more direct flights (although according to another thread that is under threat from EU law) so there will still need to be some hub operations. As the hubs slot restrictions will continue. So the 380 and the 748i will prove successful for these routes.

Added as stated above more and more people are flying then certain city pairs will need VLA's due to the sheer number of people flying between them like LON - SYD etc.

Kenneth
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:16 am

I agree with Stitch (and apologize for paraphrasing) that the biggest problem for Airbus with the WhaleJet is not the money invested that they will never recoup but rather the distraction from critical projects like the A350 and NSR.

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 41):
While the market has indeed started purchasing more midsized and single aisle aircraft, I think the view that theres a specific trend to smaller airliners which is going to damage the larger aircraft markets is essentially a fallacy.

The average size of airliner sold has been dropping for twenty years. That's a cold, hard fact, not an opinion. You're entitled to your own opinions, but you're not entitled to your own reality. The market for JumboJets collapsed exactly when the A340-600 and B777-200ER became available, despite the fact that both of the latter have significantly higher CASM. The A350 and B787 can be expected to have an even more dramatic effect on sales of the WhaleJet and SuperJumbo because they will match or beat the larger aircraft in CASM.
 
YULWinterSkies
Posts: 1266
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:42 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:22 am

Quoting Bnamaxx (Reply 26):
It seems kind of hollow that the world's two busiest airports have no plans to accomodate this albatross doesn't it?

These airports are busy because they are the main hubs of the 3 largest US airlines, AA, UA, and DL, and they are busy of RJ and narrow-bodies essentially. Not busy because they are the world's leading o&d destinations...

Have airlines expressed serious interest in flying the albatross (I like this nickname!) into ATL or ORD?
When I doubt... go running!
 
bnamaxx
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:34 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:29 am

[quote=YULWinterSkies,reply=44]These airports are busy because they are the main hubs of the 3 largest US airlines, AA, UA, and DL, and they are busy of RJ and narrow-bodies essentially. Not busy because they are the world's leading o&d destinations...

Have airlines expressed serious interest in flying the albatross (I like this nickname!) into ATL or ORD?

Off hand, AF comes to mind. Would they not like to see more feed into their largest Skyteam hub in ATL, RJ market or not? Same with LH into ORD. U.S. airlines didn't buy this thing because they were smart enough (might be an oxymoron here) to see the 380 is a niche aircraft at best and all it will ever be. But hub to hub makes sense, no?
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:30 am

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 44):
Have airlines expressed serious interest in flying the albatross (I like this nickname!)

Mariners considered the albatross to be a portent of good luck.
 
User avatar
hotelbravo
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:56 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:28 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 45):
For the last twenty years, the trend has been toward smaller airliners. There is no reason to expect a reversal of that. I expect the trend to smaller airliners to accelerate due to the A350 and B787 having CASM similar to that of the WhaleJet and the B747-8 SuperJumbo.

I disagree with this. The fact is, the number of people who want and can afford to travel is going to increase dramatically in the next 40 years, with China and India becoming major airline consumers. While some new airports may be built, there is absolutely no way that the supply of slots is going to be able to meet this dramatic increase in demand. A second powerful reason why large aircraft like the A380 are going to have a niche in the long term is that you cannot get around the fact that, given a specific set of technologies (engines, aerodynamics, materials, etc...) larger aircraft are always going to have lower CASM than small aircraft.

The A380 may not be the perfect execution of a large aircraft, and it may need new engines and a longer fuselage to become competitive in CASM, but I agree with CHRISBA777ER when he/she says that there is a real raison d'etre for the A380, and that it is definitel not dead yet.

I would add that, like the thread starter, I am puzzled why there is so much ill will against the A380. Yes, the delays are frustrating, but we are aviation enthusiasts, not customers! We should all be routing for this plane!
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:38 am

Some beautiful aircraft have been called "Albatross":



http://us.airliners.net/photos/photos/7/8/2/1091287.jpg
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:49 am

Quoting Hotelbravo (Reply 46):
The fact is, the number of people who want and can afford to travel is going to increase dramatically in the next 40 years

That has been the case during the last twenty years also, but it hasn't stopped the average airliner size from decreasing.

Quoting Hotelbravo (Reply 46):
While some new airports may be built, there is absolutely no way that the supply of slots is going to be able to meet this dramatic increase in demand.

New city pairs keep opening up every time a smaller, longer-ranged, or lower-CASM aircraft becomes available. As a result, people reach their destinations while making use of fewer slots. Anyway, the slot argument is weak as long as airports like LHR have such large numbers of narrow-body movements.

Quoting Hotelbravo (Reply 46):
A second powerful reason why large aircraft like the A380 are going to have a niche in the long term is that you cannot get around the fact that, given a specific set of technologies (engines, aerodynamics, materials, etc...) larger aircraft are always going to have lower CASM than small aircraft.

Sorry, the aerodynamics and materials of the WhaleJet will not keep up with the A350 and B787 and therefore the former will not have a CASM advantage in the long run. The B747-8 and B787-10 will clearly beat the WhaleJet in CASM. I believe the A350-1000 will also beat the WhaleJet in CASM. Game over.
 
shankly
Posts: 1194
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2000 10:42 pm

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:53 am

Not more than four years ago, more members of this forum than would now dare admit were writting the obituaries for Boeing...a fadding production line of 60's and 70's based designs and airbus unable to build a320's and a330's quickly enough

What this forum generally lacks is maturity. In my 40+ years I have seen three energy crisis, three property crashes, the £ hit $2 more times than i now remember, frightening interest rates a few times and yes cyclical big businesses boom then settle then boom again

the bus boys are simply consolidating a dating product line and being brilliant in raising the game with the a380; the boeing boys, well done to them, saw the light through those 60's and 70's cracks and have rolled out a couple of crackers in the 777 and 787

p.s. chris great joke
as is commonly said by plod here in the uk "move on nothing to see here"
L1011 - P F M
 
User avatar
hotelbravo
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:56 am

RE: The A380 Is Not Dead.

Tue Sep 26, 2006 4:07 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 48):
The B747-8 and B787-10 will clearly beat the WhaleJet in CASM.

The aerodynamics and materials on the 748 will both be inferior to those of the A380. So again, I disagree. The only reason the 748 MIGHT have a CASM advantage over the A380, in the first iteration of the two aircraft, is engines.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 77west, AAlaxfan, AC_B777, bayouflyer, CRJ900, FLIHGH, IPFreely, klkla, qfatwa, Ulsterman81 and 200 guests