eugdog
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2001 11:32 pm

Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 8:30 pm

Airbus A380 main marketing point is that it will relieve congestion at over crowded airports. Lower cost is not a real advantage because passengers are more likely to have to change planes to get to their final destination because the A380 is too big to used for point to point travel.

But I would dispute the advantage of congestion relief for two main reasons

a) If cuts to flights need to be made at an overly congested airport then the flights you would cut will be the short hall flights to Europe (get a bigger plane then small 737 or 320s). You would not cut back on the 777s to new york or chicago when you can cut back on the 737s to Europe (they loose money anyhow!)
b) point to point planes like the 787 can relieve congestion at the hub airports because they direct to their destination bypassing the hub

Very large capacity planes do not give airlines to flexibility to adjust capacity to meet demand - if there are smaller two flights to a destination you can reduce capacity and cost by withdrawing one plane from the route in the slow season. This explains why "high cost" twin jets dominate the UK to Florida route (the 747 would be cheaper if all seats are filled up)

For the A380 or any large capacity plane to be competitve its seat costs per mile must be MUCH lower inorder to offset the intrinsic advantages of smaller planes . It would appear that the A380 does not realy have that huge advantage (it is cheaper per seat mile to the 787 but not by a big enough margin.)

Evidence for this can be seen in
a) British Airways has yet to order the A380 - this is the main operator at the most congested major airport in the world! The A380 was clearly made with Heathrow in mind
b) B747-400 sales had slowed down dramatically long before the launch of the A380 as airlines clearly perferred the 777/330/340s (the 747-400 is still the lowest cost per seat jet in service today - when filled up)

[Edited 2006-11-25 12:31:12]
 
speedbird128
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:30 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 8:51 pm

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
Very large capacity planes do not give airlines to flexibility to adjust capacity to meet demand

Its perfectly manageable to swap between a 777/A33X and a A380 if you expect a slump in loads. If an airline ONLY owned A380's, then sure, but I know of not a single airline with only A380's on order.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
point to point planes like the 787 can relieve congestion at the hub airports because they direct to their destination bypassing the hub

If anything it would make congestion worse at LHR. You'd have dozens and dozens of 787's inbound from origins where the pax could have 'hubbed'.

In my opinion I don't think that the A380 was designed just for LHR. I do know of aiports that have been designed around the A380.
A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
 
CrazyHorse
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:16 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:10 pm

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 1):
Its perfectly manageable to swap between a 777/A33X and a A380 if you expect a slump in loads. If an airline ONLY owned A380's, then sure, but I know of not a single airline with only A380's on order.

Or an airline can add a new frequency to their destination with an smaller aircraft to be more flexible.
I think this is the better way for an airline to be profitable.
 
aerosol
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 10:31 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:11 pm

I forwarded this post to Airbus. They are going to close down the project as they did not see this coming.

By the way what do we do with the 748?
 
egnr
Posts: 408
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 8:31 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:20 pm

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
a) If cuts to flights need to be made at an overly congested airport then the flights you would cut will be the short hall flights to Europe (get a bigger plane then small 737 or 320s). You would not cut back on the 777s to new york or chicago when you can cut back on the 737s to Europe (they loose money anyhow!)

Those "money-losing" 737s are used to bring in passengers to fill up the 777s and also to offer connections to other destinations for people arriving on the 777s. Cut them, and you make your longhaul services less attractive.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
) British Airways has yet to order the A380 - this is the main operator at the most congested major airport in the world! The A380 was clearly made with Heathrow in mind



Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
b) point to point planes like the 787 can relieve congestion at the hub airports because they direct to their destination bypassing the hub

British Airways has not placed an order for the Boeing 787 and seems content to carry on with its 'hub to hub' or 'hub to point' strategy for the forseeable future - concentrating services on Heathrow rather than operating from regional (point) airports within the UK.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
b) B747-400 sales had slowed down dramatically long before the launch of the A380 as airlines clearly perferred the 777/330/340s (the 747-400 is still the lowest cost per seat jet in service today - when filled up)

Now we see sales of the Boeing 777-300ER increasing quite rapidly, showing the demand is there for larger aircraft, but the 747 has not seen passenger orders for some time - probably due to the age of the design. Airlines may be less willing to pay vast sums of money for what is essentially a 1960s design. The same fate has befallen the A300, B757 and B767 - airline orders dwindled to very few or none at all as they moved towards the A330, A321, B737-800/-900, etc.

The orders for the 787 show there is the requirement for a 767-sized airliner, but for a number of years, 767 sales have been extremely low - the 767 had reached the end of the preiod where it becomes an attractive purchase as a brand new airframe.
7late7, A3latey, Sukhoi Superlate... what's going on?
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:37 pm

An much talked about but always interesting thread.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
a) If cuts to flights need to be made at an overly congested airport then the flights you would cut will be the short hall flights to Europe (get a bigger plane then small 737 or 320s). You would not cut back on the 777s to new york or chicago when you can cut back on the 737s to Europe (they loose money anyhow!)

Perhaps. But somewhere you will have to make cuts and reduce frequency or network coverage. Is there any reason why a 777 should be any less susceptible to this than a 737? It's the same effect just on a different scale, you double the aircraft size and reduce a frequency and/or destination and gain a spare slot. It's essentially arguing against fragmentation only to promote it.....

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
b) point to point planes like the 787 can relieve congestion at the hub airports because they direct to their destination bypassing the hub

Arguably. But there just isn't the demand for intense point to point we'd like. I actually doubt the transatlantic scene will change much at all, the 787 is larger than the 767, and although operating costs are lower, airlines are still going to want them on the most profitable routes. I suspect most of the 787 flights will be Hub-Point like DL at ATL. On the Transpacific and Europe-Asia routes though there will be changes, especially amongst the minor airlines, due to the increased range of the smaller aircraft. I wonder how economical the 787 will be when it's flying 7000nm compared to 3000nm though, but that's another thread.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
For the A380 or any large capacity plane to be competitive its seat costs per mile must be MUCH lower in order to offset the intrinsic advantages of smaller planes . It would appear that the A380 does not really have that huge advantage (it is cheaper per seat mile to the 787 but not by a big enough margin.)

I agree. It remains to be seen whether the 787 will be cheaper to operate per seat than the A380 though. The 787-10, maybe.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
a) British Airways has yet to order the A380 - this is the main operator at the most congested major airport in the world! The A380 was clearly made with Heathrow in mind

Well, BA have yet to order anything and are reviewing the 787, 777, 748, A350 and A380 at the minute. They do have the lion's share of slots at LHR though.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
b) B747-400 sales had slowed down dramatically long before the launch of the A380 as airlines clearly perferred the 777/330/340s (the 747-400 is still the lowest cost per seat jet in service today - when filled up)

Yes but it's no where near as out in front as it used to be. And like you say....

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
For the A380 or any large capacity plane to be competitive its seat costs per mile must be MUCH lower in order to offset the intrinsic advantages of smaller planes .

My 0.02GBP, and i welcome the nay-sayers. 

Rj111

[Edited 2006-11-25 13:41:49]
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:37 pm

Nice to read your personal opinion; now, to read a recent professional opinion based on an in depth micro-analys of no less than 400 airlines and their future operations worldwide, go to:

http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/gmf/index.html

and read the 74 pages full of professional market forecasts like the one you are trying to make based on loads of statistical evidence from around the globe, analysis of the current market situation, airline opinions and growth predictions for the future from other industry sources combined...

I am sure it will contain interesting material for you...

In short: forget about seeing the A380 as a plane linking only the biggest airports in Asia or North-America to the biggest airports of Europe; the A380 will predominantly be a mass transporter on medium haul intra-Asian thrunk routes, much like the 777 or A330 is today.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8529
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:45 pm

^
Finally a dose of reality in this thread. The A380 is a suitable antidote for the medium haul capacity crisis that will hit the Asian region in under a decade's time. Just don't expect to see it in the Japanese domestic market. The Airbus sales pitch at Narita last week was a colossal waste of time.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 10:54 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 7):
Just don't expect to see it in the Japanese domestic market. The Airbus sales pitch at Narita last week was a colossal waste of time.

Why was that? Narita is also one of the more slot constrained airports and the A380 is often touted as a solution for some if its problems.

Can you give any details?

[Edited 2006-11-25 15:13:43]
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12362
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:00 pm

Long-haul pax and freight to/from China, India and other major Asian and South Asia countries that contain about 40% of the world's population will be the payoff for the A-380. Some of these countries are limited in creating new airports, they may want to limit access to non-home airlines to protect their own national airlines, the huge growth of trade and manufacturing causing more business demand and a growing middle class who will want to and will be able to afford to travel as pax are more factors that support the A-380.
 
trex8
Posts: 4578
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:02 pm

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 8):
Why was that? Can you give any details?

because they aren't building 35% of the airframe in Japan! Smile
 
OU812
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:19 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:26 pm

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...London+Heathrow+due+to+larger.html

DATE:22/11/06
SOURCE:Flight International

BA CEO Walsh warns Airbus A380 'could add to runway crisis' at London Heathrow due to larger separations

By Max Kingsley-Jones
Greater separation 'threatens Heathrow capacity': Walsh

British Airways chief executive Willie Walsh has warned that the Airbus A380's arrival at its congested London Heathrow hub next year will hampe rather than help the airport's runway capacity crisis due to the approach separation distance required for the ultra-large airliner.

Speaking at the Royal Aeronautical Society last week, Walsh said "the A380 sales talk" indicated that the 550-seater "was the likeliest short-term relief in terms of runway pressure" for Heathrow, "providing effectively three slots for the price of two".

 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:50 pm

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):
now, to read a recent professional opinion based on an in depth micro-analys of no less than 400 airlines and their future operations worldwide...and read the 74 pages full of professional market forecasts like the one you are trying to make based on loads of statistical evidence from around the globe,

I'm sure the "old" A350 had tons of marketing analysis to support it too.

Garbage in; garbage out; as they say.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):
the A380 will predominantly be a mass transporter on medium haul intra-Asian thrunk routes,

The where are the orders from Asia?
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
egnr
Posts: 408
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 8:31 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 12:27 am

Quoting OU812 (Reply 11):
BA CEO Walsh warns Airbus A380 'could add to runway crisis' at London Heathrow due to larger separations

"The chances that we will buy Airbus A380 are as good as ever. We have absolutely no doubt that EADS will resolve the problems surrounding the project," German newspaper Handelsblatt quoted BA chief executive Willie Walsh as saying in an advance extract of an interview to be published on Tuesday.

"There are good arguments for us to buy a few Airbus A380s," he said, adding that BA would need at least 10 of the jets to run its long-haul services efficiently.
LINK

Willie Walsh is giving out mixed messages on the A380...
7late7, A3latey, Sukhoi Superlate... what's going on?
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 12:44 am

Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

See the facts:

The B787-8 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 20percent on each flight
The B787-9 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 25percent on each flight
The B787-8 replaces the B767-200 - add capacity around 30percent on each flight

The orders for the B777-300ER are increasing more and more - THIS airplane is a hub-to-hub airplane.

Boeing is confident in launching the B748I with 467seats - a hub airplane as well...


Johnny
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:25 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

See the facts:

The B787-8 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 20percent on each flight
The B787-9 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 25percent on each flight

The 788 vs 763 is only 10% more with the former in 9 abreast. The 3 class 763 capacity is 218, the 3 class seating arrangement in 9 abreast for the 788 is something like 237.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8529
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:30 am

Why was that? Narita is also one of the more slot constrained airports and the A380 is often touted as a solution for some if its problems.

Can you give any details?


97% of Narita's traffic is international. I was referring to the Japanese domestic market. Nobody here is convinced that the A380 could find any success plying this country's high density domestic routes.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22953
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:39 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

For the record, Airbus buys into it just as much with the A330, A340, and A350(XWB) families.

Fact is, both companies believe in both patterns of travel and have appropriate families to address it.
 
trex8
Posts: 4578
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:42 am

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 12):
Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):the A380 will predominantly be a mass transporter on medium haul intra-Asian thrunk routes,
The where are the orders from Asia?

SQ, KE, TG, MH, CZ and last time I checked UAE and therefore EK are in Asia.
 
11Bravo
Posts: 1678
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:54 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:43 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
See the facts:...

That is spin and you know it.

The choice is not nearly as black and white as you suggest. There will still be hubs, AND point to point will increase. No one is suggesting that ALL air travel will become either hub-based or point to point.

There is clearly a trend toward fragmentation and increased frequency, but does that mean hubs will disappear? Of course not.

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
The orders for the B777-300ER are increasing more and more

..., and more than a few of those orders are replacements for B747s.

The order books for the A380 and the B747 speak for themselves on this issue. Could that change? Yes. Is there tangible evidence to suggest that we will be seeing hundreds and hundreds of new VLAs flying around in the next 5-10 years? Nope.
WhaleJets Rule!
 
eugdog
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2001 11:32 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:44 am

Speedbird said that airlines could substitue the A380 with a smaller plane during the slow season such as a 777/a340. That is not the optimal solution since you have the costly A380 idle during the slow season . If you operate the route with two smaller planes then only one of the smaller planes is idle as oppose to a bigger plane. Also the two plane service has the advantage of giving customrs a choice of time to depart.

Cutting back on short haul flights is not cost free but the loss can be partially offset by operating larger planes (example A321 as oppose to A319). If many of the passengers are feeding into long haul flights then having a frequent schedule is not so important. All you need is specific flights to connect with the long haul flights. The taxi style business passenger flights is not so important. And besides such traffic is in decline as there are more direct flights.

I am not saying that hub and spoke is coming to an end - but there is not doubt that point to point will become more common and that hub and spoke requirements will shrink somewhat.

BTW I think the B777 is selling more and more because the long range A340 has become obsolete with its 4 engines! Also I think the B777 is gradually replacing B747 - I note that BA does not operate anymore 747 to New York - there was a time when it was exclusively 747 from LHR to New York

[Edited 2006-11-25 17:48:46]
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:46 am

@ Atmx2000

The seating arrangement for the B787-8 is 250 according Boeing.

The normal 3-class layout for the B767-300ER is around 205 seats.

Difference 45 seats - that makes 21,95 percent...


Johnny
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 2:17 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

See the facts:

The B787-8 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 20percent on each flight
The B787-9 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 25percent on each flight
The B787-8 replaces the B767-200 - add capacity around 30percent on each flight

The orders for the B777-300ER are increasing more and more - THIS airplane is a hub-to-hub airplane.

Boeing is confident in launching the B748I with 467seats - a hub airplane as well...

 thumbsup  Finally a rational post in this thread. Couldnt agree more.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 2:51 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 21):
The seating arrangement for the B787-8 is 250 according Boeing.

Boeing gives a range for the 3 class 787-8, stretching from 200 to 250, dependent on whether the aircraft is configured in 8Y or 9Y and on the particulars of the configuration in each class such as pitch.

Boeing shows a specifc configuration for the 787-8 in their aircraft brochure
that is 14C, 44J and 179Y for a total of 237.

For the 763ER they have a config of 18C, 46J, and 154Y for a total of 218 on the website and a config of 18C, 42J, and 150Y for a total of 210 in the airport compatibility document. Both of these configurations are premium heavy, making the 788 look larger.

Regardless, the relative increase is around 8 to 13%, using a 9Y 787 configuration. The difference would be less with a 8Y configuration.

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 22):
   Finally a rational post in this thread. Couldnt agree more.

Too bad his numbers are wrong.

[Edited 2006-11-25 19:01:48]
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 3:05 am

Quoting Eugdog (Reply 20):
I note that BA does not operate anymore 747 to New York - there was a time when it was exclusively 747 from LHR to New York

I think you meant "doesn't operate only 747's anymore to New York"..... Wink
"Up the Irons!"
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 3:17 am

@ Atmx2000

YOUR figures are wrong...!

Check the floor areas of both airplanes and see the difference.
Standard config. for the B767 is 2-3-2 and for the B787 3-3-3.

The B787-8 has around the same capacity as the B764, not as the 763.

This will be confirmed by a lot of users here, as we had that discussion several times already.


Johnny
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 3:19 am

Yet another BIG A380 vs SMALL 787/777 thread........we have done this before and there is no definitive answer.

This is yet another take on Boeings "market fragmentation theory" suggesting that more and more point to point routes and more and more routes from major hubs to smaller distant cities will be introduced that supported the launch of the 787 program.....compared to Airbus "hub to hub" therory indicating that bigger airplanes with more seats are necessary to connect hub airports and important destinations world wide that was used to support the launch of the A380. Which is correct.....who knows? Boeing has launched the 748 in addition to the 787 and Airbus has the A350/XWB in the works along with the A380, so the only conclusion that can be reached is that airlines need both both high and medium capacity long haul airliners.....and airlines will pick the types that are most appropriate to their route systems.

In five years time, we can again look at the success of the 748, 787, A350, A380 programs and try to determine who got it right.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 4:21 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 25):
Check the floor areas of both airplanes and see the difference.
Standard config. for the B767 is 2-3-2 and for the B787 3-3-3.

I'm perfectly aware of the larger cabin. But it looks like a lot of that extra space has gone into making the premium cabins more luxurious, with wider seats & aisles and bigger galleys. Route fragmentation will be driven by premium customers and servicing their needs takes priority. For long haul missions the 787 will be configured closer to the 763 in capacity. In fact one of the long range configurations Boeing proposes is closer to the 762 in capacity, with seating of 187.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
dw747400
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:24 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 4:47 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

See the facts:

The B787-8 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 20percent on each flight
The B787-9 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 25percent on each flight
The B787-8 replaces the B767-200 - add capacity around 30percent on each flight

The orders for the B777-300ER are increasing more and more - THIS airplane is a hub-to-hub airplane.

Boeing is confident in launching the B748I with 467seats - a hub airplane as well...

How exactly does this prove that fragmentation is not occurring? Just because they are slightly larger than 767 doesn't mean 787s are not intended as point to point airplanes. There are several reasons for an increase in size, some of which are mentioned above. Obviously, the slightly larger frame improves CASM and provides more flexibility for interior layouts. As other posters have mentioned, premium cabins are getting larger and are critical to point to point operations. Of course, some of the growth is due to growing demand for air travel, but it is a relatively modest increase. Thus, this proves nothing. Show some route data indicating an increase in plane sizes over the past five years and you'll have a valid point.

Fragmentation is a fact--it has occurred and will continue to occur. The questions are how much, how fast, and where. Claiming its a marketing ploy by Boeing is naive, but so is assuming there is no place for a VLA.
CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 5:01 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

If its nothing more than PR.......why is Airbus hoping to develop the A350/XWB? And why do A330 sales continue to be a bright spot in Airbus' recent lackluster sales of widebody aircraft?
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 5:21 am

Why does everybody assume fragmentation will also ALWAYS lead to smaller planes?

Fragmentation is leading to smaller planes ONLY in the traditional aviation markets Japan, Europe and America, because there the annual increase in travellers is not enough to warrant equally big planes on more routes. Spreading out only slightly more pax over many more routes gives lower pax numbers and thus the need for smaller planes indeed...

In Asia however, both Airbus and Boeing forecast a real aviation boom over the next 2 decades and the consensus between the manufacturers seems to grow fragmentation there will simply absorb the stunning increase of passengers WITHOUT need to reduce the size of the planes, even on the contrary...

If you are linking cities which have tens of millions of inhabitants each, you are in effect looking at the classic point-to-point AND hub-to-hub traffic as we define it now AT THE SAME TIME!

It could be argued that more and smaller planes would offer more flexibility for the passengers on these routes too, but if the number of city pairs which qualify as point-to-point AND hub-to-hub at the same time is getting too large, you end up with infrastructural problems at these 'points/hubs'. An airspace around such a point/hub can only handle as much traffic as it can fit into it and full is full (e.g. London), at what time the ONLY way to increase pax numbers is by larger planes...

Just my reading of the annual market outlook regarding VLA's by both Boeing AND Airbus, which forecast significantly increased numbers of VLAs compared to last year (and the year before that)...
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 5:36 am

Fragmentation means existing hub-routes with big airplanes will be replaced by non-hub flights with smaller airplanes.

In german "Fragment" is the same as "Part of".

I totally agree with you guys that we will have MORE hub-to-hub-flights than today PLUS new non-hub-routes.

Johnny
 
eugdog
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2001 11:32 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 5:55 am

from SLZ396

"An airspace around such a point/hub can only handle as much traffic as it can fit into it and full is full (e.g. London), at what time the ONLY way to increase pax numbers is by larger planes..."

That is true but the first planes to enlarged are likely to be the smaller planes such as A320s 737s - I think the bigger planes such as B777 will not be replaced by large planes for a long time to come.

I would like to know what % of traffic into Heathrow is A320/737 or smaller. If for example 90% of traffic are small aircraft and just 10% are big planes then surely the way to ease congestion is to target the small planes!

And that makes sense - for an example if there is too much traffic on the road you do not enlarge the traffic efficient buses instead you focus on the small cars. Same applies to planes

Regarding Asia - the limiting factor for using mega capacity planes for short haul flights are the time to take to board them. I would have thought that trains are the future for mass travel in Asia except between Japan and main line Asia _ I think China are planning to develop a massive high speed infrastructure
 
sstsomeday
Posts: 821
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 6:19 am

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 8):
Why was that? Narita is also one of the more slot constrained airports and the A380 is often touted as a solution for some if its problems.

Can you give any details?

Well, my take would be: Tokyo has experienced a very clear, ongoing example of fragmentation over the years.

Originally, Tokyo was the single international overseas destination for Japan, with Haneda as it's only airport. As traffic increased, another airport with a single long runway was introduced, Narita. (Fragmentation). As traffic to Narita increased, a second, shorter runway was built for domestic / intra-Asia flights (so, more slots). More recently, Osaka and Kansai have been experiencing increased traffic growth as major international hubs, for both O + D traffic in heavily populated South Central Japan, but increasingly, transfer traffic. This takes traffic from Haneda, but especially Narita. (Fragmentation again). In fact, Narita has rushed the extension of the second runway to intercontinental capability because they don't want to lose any more traffic to Osaka or Kansai. Additionally, I would imagine the dramatic increase in transfer traffic at other Asian hubs in that part of Asia, such as Seoul, have also slowed the growth of traffic at Narita as compared to what It might have been. Also, the range capabilities of A/C to fly incredible distances, such as JFK/Hong Kong, allow airlines to not do a tech stop in Tokyo anymore.

So, over the years the Tokyo area has solved it's slot restriction issues by other means (more runways, more airports), and without a VLA. In fact, I would imagine that even 747 traffic to Tokyo, in terms of percentage of carried passengers, has lost ground to other large, long distance twins.

I think, if there will be a saving grace of the 380, over time, it will be the dramatic increase in traffic we can expect from developing economic superpowers such as China and India. Only time will tell. The selfish reason I would like to see the 380 succeed is that I think all that capacity will help keep the prices down, for us low-lifes sitting back in Coach...
I come in peace
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4962
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 6:25 am

Of course it´s a big advantage with bigger capacity, people tend to forget about Hadjj flying, also when foggy and with limited number of takeoffs you surely want the
extra capacity rather than cancel flights.
There are many routes people not aware of that could use the extra capacity, Surinam-Holland is one of these, French Guiana-Paris another.
It puzzles me that people take for granted what preformance B787 will have,
it´ll do the maiden flight earliest next year, only flewn in computers so far.
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
787engineer
Posts: 545
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:08 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 5:00 pm

Quoting Johnny (Reply 21):
The seating arrangement for the B787-8 is 250 according Boeing.

The normal 3-class layout for the B767-300ER is around 205 seats.

Difference 45 seats - that makes 21,95 percent...

Actually the 787-8 is designed for 210 to 250 (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/787-8prod.html) passengers depending on 8Y/9Y and the seating configuration. Boeing's 'nominal' seating configuration with 9Y seats 237 pax according to the airport compatability brochure.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/787brochure.pdf

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
The B787-8 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 20percent on each flight
The B787-9 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 25percent on each flight
The B787-8 replaces the B767-200 - add capacity around 30percent on each flight

First you quote capacity. . .

Quoting Johnny (Reply 25):
Check the floor areas of both airplanes and see the difference.
Standard config. for the B767 is 2-3-2 and for the B787 3-3-3.

The B787-8 has around the same capacity as the B764, not as the 763.

Then when someone calls you out on your numbers, you turn to floor areas  Yeah sure. The 787-8 essentially replaces both the 763 and 764. According to Boeing's website the 763 is a 218 pax (3-class) aircraft, and the 764 is a 245 pax (3-class) aircraft. The 787-8 covers 210-250 pax. The 787-9 covers 250-290. Airlines don't categorize airplanes by floor space, they categorize them by their pax capacity and range. Floor area can be deceiving (i.e. curved walls, etc), and don't directly determine the CASM/efficiency of the aircraft. In general all planes are growing in size since worldwide demand has continued to increase. Look how the 737, 747, A300/A310/A330/A340 have grown since their introduction.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):
now, to read a recent professional opinion based on an in depth micro-analys of no less than 400 airlines and their future operations worldwide, go to:

http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/g....html

A professional opinion, as noted on Airbus's website. Sure i'll take that without a big grain of salt  Yeah sure.

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 5):
Perhaps. But somewhere you will have to make cuts and reduce frequency or network coverage. Is there any reason why a 777 should be any less susceptible to this than a 737? It's the same effect just on a different scale, you double the aircraft size and reduce a frequency and/or destination and gain a spare slot. It's essentially arguing against fragmentation only to promote it.....

I think it should be pretty obvious why a 777 flight would be less susceptible to be "cut" than a 737. With most airlines there are many more 737 flights than 777 flights. For example if an airline has two 777 flights each day to JFK and 10 737 flights each day to FRA, they would be much more likely to replace 2 737 flights with one A330/A306 or 787-3 flight than to replace both their 777 flights with one A380. Replacing both 777 flights eliminates any flexibility they had on that route, whereas replacing two 737 flights only decreases their flexibility a little. Most of the slots at (most) airports are taken up by the growing number RJs and narrowbodies. I don't have such numbers on hand, but IMO a 5% decrease in narrowbodies by replacing some of them with mid-range widebodies would open up many more slots than decreasing # of widebodies by 10, 15, or even 25%.
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 5:38 pm

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 36):
Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):
now, to read a recent professional opinion based on an in depth micro-analys of no less than 400 airlines and their future operations worldwide, go to:

http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/g....html

A professional opinion, as noted on Airbus's website. Sure i'll take that without a big grain of salt .

Okay, and how much salt do you take for Boeing's market outlook for VLA's?

800 in 2004
900 in 2005
990 in 2006
1100 in 2007???

Apparently BOTH manufacturers see a GROWING market for VLA's, based on the spectacular increase of air traffic which they expect in the Asian Pacific region over the next 2 decades, leading to the use of large, and even very large planes on routes which today are still very thin...

The annual traffic increase in Asia is going to be so spectacular that fragmentation there will not automatically always lead to smaller planes, quite on the contrary... read Boeings or Airbus latest market analysis: they both basically say the same, hence the growing numbers of VLA from both!
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:38 pm

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 36):
I think it should be pretty obvious why a 777 flight would be less susceptible to be "cut" than a 737. With most airlines there are many more 737 flights than 777 flights. For example if an airline has two 777 flights each day to JFK and 10 737 flights each day to FRA, they would be much more likely to replace 2 737 flights with one A330/A306 or 787-3 flight than to replace both their 777 flights with one A380.

True but short haul routes are much more sensitive to frequency.

Also the only airline that does fly those 2 routes is BA and there are 7 daily to JFK (2 772s and 5 744s) as well as 3 to EWR and 8 daily to FRA (not sure of the breakdown i'd imagine some 757s/767s).

That said i think the main argument was that you can now transport more people per slot (ignoring the wake turbulence issue for the moment) which will increase airport capacity where frequencies is either not needed or not possible - like SQ's SIN-LHR. Culling every double daily 777 service and replacing it with an A380 may be a bad idea in a most cases, the double daily is probably there beacuase it's a route which demands frequency.
 
787engineer
Posts: 545
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:08 am

RE: Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho

Mon Nov 27, 2006 3:56 am

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 37):

Okay, and how much salt do you take for Boeing's market outlook for VLA's?

Never said I take Boeing's market outlook at face value, nor should anyone. I'm just saying to tout the advantages of the A380, a better professional opinion should be one that is more objective and comes from neither of the manufacturers. The forecasts for VLAs show a growing market, but is it growing nearly as fast as the mid-size widebodies or narrowbodies? The VLA market has been growing since the introduction of the 747, decades ago. I don't forsee the demand increasing that much faster than in the past 40 years, especially when compared to the growing demand for NBs and mid-size WBs. Both Airbus and Boeing show the majority of the growth coming from single-aisle and mid-size widebodies.

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 38):
beacuase it's a route which demands frequency.

. . . or flexibility for seasonal changes in demand. I wasn't trying to point out a specific airline, I was speaking hypothetically. In most cases most slots are taken up by NBs and RJs which carry significantly fewer passengers than widebodies. Replacing RJs with NBs and NBs with WBs helps to open up slots at the expense of some frequency. If it was really necessary to get more slots (and if the airlines determine it's financially advantageous), I'm sure the airlines wouldn't hestitate to do it. Even though demand on short haul routes are more sensitive to frequency, losing a little of the short-haul revenue on a route to open up a slot for a long-haul plane (if they can fill the long-haul plane) is usually more profitable. Of course in many cases the short-haul routes are bringing in passengers for the long-haul, and it gets pretty tricky to predict what will happen. . . that's why those airline execs are paid the big dollarsign 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aab498, airzim, bjorn14, brandnsn, CALTECH, flyeal, frmrCapCadet, Google Adsense [Bot], hufftheweevil, KLDC10, lcycs300, MEA-707, Noreastshuttle, TheF15Ace, Tigerguy, xms3200, Yahoo [Bot] and 288 guests