acabgd
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:55 am

US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 10:55 am

I was wondering why there is not a single American (passenger) carrier that has ordered the A380.

In previous topics many said that US carriers want more flights and choices for their passengers, than one flight daily to a certain destination. However, it seems that most of the rest of the World disagrees and is happy to order the A380 to fly to, say, JFK or LAX.

Why wouldn't the US airlines fly direct from JFK to DXB, JNB, or from LAX to BKK, SIN... with an A380 while on the other hand other international carriers have high loads on these routes?
CSud,D9,MD8x,D10,Trid,BAC1,A30,31,319,320,321,33,346,B71,72,73,74,75,76,77,L10,S20,A42,A72,T13,T15,F50,F70,F100,B146
 
Cessna057
Posts: 417
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:24 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:16 am

For one thing there jus isnt quite the demand to throw a 555 pax plane from LAX to SIN or JFK to DXB / JNB.

Also, as you had said, many US carriers want both point to point routes and more frequencies on them versus hub to hub routes onces a day or less.
Hold it . . . Hold it . . . HOLD THE FREAKIN NOSE UP!!
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:23 am

Quoting Acabgd (Thread starter):
However, it seems that most of the rest of the World disagrees and is happy to order the A380 to fly to, say, JFK or LAX.

You cite an opinion as fact and then ask why one single nation is out of the loop.

Provide some proof that the rest of the World disagrees, or that they are all intending to fly it to JFK.

Or just continue to believe what you want to believe.

The world is actually buying 787s, A330s, 777s and even A350s (should they ever be offered) in huge numbers, the same planes that the USA carriers are buying...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
acabgd
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:55 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:37 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 2):
Provide some proof that the rest of the World disagrees, or that they are all intending to fly it to JFK

Well, from launch customers of the A380 I highly suspect that AF, EK, QR and VS will fly to JFK. I'm not saying virtually "all of the World", as I didn't hear Albanian Airlines ordered the A380. But I certainly ment most of major international carriers that ordered the A380.

Therefore, if all these carriers can fill an A380, how come there is not a single US carrier doing the same in the opposite direction?

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 2):
The world is actually buying 787s, A330s, 777s and even A350s (should they ever be offered) in huge numbers, the same planes that the USA carriers are buying...

That's very fine with me, but my question was about the A380, not about the planes you mention.
CSud,D9,MD8x,D10,Trid,BAC1,A30,31,319,320,321,33,346,B71,72,73,74,75,76,77,L10,S20,A42,A72,T13,T15,F50,F70,F100,B146
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:57 am

Quoting Acabgd (Thread starter):
Why wouldn't the US airlines fly direct from JFK to DXB, JNB, or from LAX to BKK, SIN... with an A380 while on the other hand other international carriers have high loads on these routes?

Many of the airlines planning to fly A380s to the US plan on collecting traffic in their hubs and are geographically well positioned to do so by collecting international traffic from neighboring countries that have poorly equipped long haul airlines. US airlines hubs are not positioned to collect traffic from much more than the US and parts of Canada and Mexico. And most Americans don't want to be forced to go through LAX or JFK to get somewhere internationally. US international traffic ends up being split up between a lot of large international airports (JFK,EWR,LAX,ORD,IAH,DFW,MIA,IAD,SFO,ATL) and amongst several large US airlines.

On top of that, the US is a high labor cost country with heavily unionized airlines that make it difficult to service large numbers of economy passengers when faced with competition from lower labor cost countries. I think the era of the overvalued dollar from 1997 to 2002 magnified that problem and forced a lot of US airlines to retreat into the US domestic market and let their international alliance partners carry more of the international traffic.

[Edited 2006-11-26 04:02:32]
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
Philly Phlyer
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 23, 1999 12:05 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 12:03 pm

The US carriers are not buying the 380 for the same reason most of them don't operate 747s (and won't buy the 748), it is too big and no longer fits the business model that has evolved for the US carriers. In the US market, the flying public wants frequency and convenience, not a limited number of flights between hubs.

As a result, 777s, 330s, 767s and even 757s fly international routes originally flown with 747s. Domestically, the 757s, 321s, 737s, 320s, and 319s are flying routes that once were the domain of 747s, DC-10s, and L1011s. Most large US carriers that originally flew the 747 long ago abandoned it.

As engine technology improved to give the smaller jets the range of the bigger jets, the bigger jets and many hubs became outdated. No longer did carriers need to change planes in Pittsburgh, Memphis, St. Louis, Kansas City or Dallas (Delta) for transcon flights. Instead of flying larger aircraft into these hubs, they flew the smaller jets directly.

In the 60s, 70s, and 80s, one flew through hubs on flights from between two large cities. These days, the only use of most hubs is to connect small or medium cities with one another or to large cities. Between the largest cities, it is all direct flying in smaller jets than used 20 years ago.

In the 60s or 70s, most flights to Europe were funneled through New York or Boston. With the success of the smaller twins (767 started it), this model was replaced with direct service from most larger US cities.

This is the same reason that Boeing decided to not go after the VLA market. It's analysis of the future market did not show a big enough market to warrant the development cost and time.
 
User avatar
ERJ170
Posts: 5466
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 11:15 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 12:03 pm

Quoting Acabgd (Reply 3):
Therefore, if all these carriers can fill an A380, how come there is not a single US carrier doing the same in the opposite direction?

Here's a thought.. compare US airlines to ROW...

US - International flying airlines have at least 3 hubs.
ROW - 1 or 2 hubs

US - Codeshare on flight throughout ROW
ROW - Codeshare for flights throughout US

US - Flies multiple daily flights on medium aircraft unless demand is LARGE
ROW - Flies single daily, double daily, or weekly flights on large aircraft

US - Splits traffic between different hubs based on location of passengers
ROW - All passengers from a single starting point.

US Airlines don't move large volume of passengers from a single point to another single point at one single time. THe US passenger demands options and due to the large number of competing airlines in the US, if it is not offered by one airline then another one will get that business..

Hope this makes sense..
Aiming High and going far..
 
ChiGB1973
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 6:39 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 12:07 pm

AA, DL, HP and CO could not fit the 747 into their operations, much less something bigger.

NW and UA use them mostly for Asian routes, which are much larger than any of the other carrier's Asian networks.

UA uses them for Australia, which the 777, for UA, was not feasible.

I would venture to say that UA and NW would just assume get rid of the 747, but need it for a few routes, therefore having a fleet of them is necessary for their token markets.

Both would go for smaller planes with more frequency than go for something like the A-380 when it comes time to dispose of the 747s. The 748 is a possibility, but I think the 773 more of a probability.

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

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 12:12 pm

Quoting Acabgd (Reply 3):
Well, from launch customers of the A380 I highly suspect that AF, EK, QR and VS will fly to JFK

I have no idea where QR plans on flying with their A380s, but I suspect it is London. They don't have enough US traffic and they have a long ways to go to build up their hub.

We all know EK's grandiose plans for DXB.

AF dominates long haul air travel in France from an airport in Paris, in which most French long haul traffic is concentrated. Americans would never tolerate the level of centralization.

VS depends on huge O&D traffic from London to feed the limited number of US routes they have using the limited number of LHR slots they have. The US airlines that have the biggest hubs in NYC (CO,DL) can't fly to LHR, or have more than enough slots to provide many frequencies (AA).
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
ORDagent
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:24 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 12:20 pm

It's that hub or not hub debate again! AA has created a great European network particularly out of ORD by using smaller aircraft. The market could fill a DC-10 to frankfurt but the 767-200 was great for smaller cities and could be bumped up to the 767-300 when demand called for it. The MD-11 and then the 777 finally took the trunk routes. AA could never have created a European network flying 747s. Despite the massive feed at ORD for AA it wouldn't have worked. Look at CO US and even AA they are entering markets with the 757! The 380 is for Asia hub to hub from one airline to its alliance partner for feed. When I worked for AA in the '90s it was all about schedule convenience. We joked if Crandall could get the F100 to fly to LHR he'd have hourly service!
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6661
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:01 pm

Ok how about this one, forget about the airlines and deal with the US Govt.
The US govt. does not force all north east traffic through NYC or BOS airports, nor do they limit international carriers to specific airports, the UK and Bermuda II are the exception.

The US govt. has placed customs and immigrations facilities throughout their country to accomodate their citizens, and now that OEM's are building smaller a/c with intercontinental range, there is no longer any need for airlines to force its customers to change planes at a hub to travel internationally.

To make a long story short, the US happens to be a very large land mass, hence multiple large airports abound, de-centralization was inevitable.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:43 pm

Quoting Par13del (Reply 10):
To make a long story short, the US happens to be a very large land mass, hence multiple large airports abound, de-centralization was inevitable.

Centralization furthermore is politically unviable. While the NY and NJ might like the idea of forcing everyone to go through NYC, every other state has different ideas.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 6:50 pm

Quoting Par13del (Reply 10):
To make a long story short, the US happens to be a very large land mass, hence multiple large airports abound, de-centralization was inevitable.



Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 11):
Centralization furthermore is politically unviable. While the NY and NJ might like the idea of forcing everyone to go through NYC, every other state has different ideas.

These are all good points, and demonstrates the progressive nature of the USA airline market. The UK is also good in this regard, and so is Japan as well as Canada. And outside of VS, who is likely to never even take delivery, no airline in Canada, Japan, the USA or the UK are going to fly the A380 right now, and if any do order, it won't be for delivery before 2013-14. I doubt even BA will fly it.

The premise is false. The rest of the world has not signed on. Certain carriers have, and some with a token amount. KE's few orders, VS's few orders that may never come, MH same. China has some token orders as well, for political reasons as much as anything (I've never seen a rhyme or reason for how China orders planes, be they Boeing or Airbus or others). Outside of EK, QF, and SQ, the only real players in the A380 order book so far are the national carriers of the two countries most involved in building it.

And EK buying it certainly doesn't prove much. EK seems to buy EVERYTHING and in large numbers.

Before the OP tries to paint the USA as the outcast, let's see a few more major airlines buy the A380 in significant numbers and demonstrate that it is worth the investment.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 12:02 am

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 4):
Many of the airlines planning to fly A380s to the US plan on collecting traffic in their hubs and are geographically well positioned to do so by collecting international traffic from neighboring countries that have poorly equipped long haul airlines. US airlines hubs are not positioned to collect traffic from much more than the US and parts of Canada and Mexico. And most Americans don't want to be forced to go through LAX or JFK to get somewhere internationally. US international traffic ends up being split up between a lot of large international airports (JFK,EWR,LAX,ORD,IAH,DFW,MIA,IAD,SFO,ATL) and amongst several large US airlines.

One of the advantages I most appreciate as an international passenger leaving the US is the sigificant options I have. If I want to go to east from DC, I have IAD, ORD, EWR, JFK and ATL to choose airlines and routes. If I want to go west, I have IAD, ORD, LAX, SFO, and SEA to choose from.

Quoting Philly phlyer (Reply 5):
The US carriers are not buying the 380 for the same reason most of them don't operate 747s (and won't buy the 748), it is too big and no longer fits the business model that has evolved for the US carriers. In the US market, the flying public wants frequency and convenience, not a limited number of flights between hubs.

One advantage I as a US passenger is that I won't be getting off the airplane when I arrive along with 500 other passengers. I know that many Anetters can't wait to fly the A380 because it will be the biggest thing in the air. That prospect is the last thing on my mind. Where I have a choice, I always opt for a 767 over a 330, a 330 over a 777, and a 777 over a 744. I simply don't enjoy flying amidst a mass of humanity, and I susepct I'm not alone.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 10):
To make a long story short, the US happens to be a very large land mass, hence multiple large airports abound, de-centralization was inevitable.

 checkmark  The obvious response to the original question, I believe.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12360
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 12:25 am

I would also add that many in the USA who will be flying where the A-380 will be mainly used may perfer the much higher quality in flight service of foreign airlines like SQ. Such levels of service attracts a lot more long haul premium passangers than USA based airlines can. Of course, those non-USA airlines can afford larger staffing and superior service due to much lower labor costs from their bases.
Those using USA based airlines include those wanting to fly directly from cities other than JFK/EWR, ORD, LAX, ATL or need connecting service within the USA. Some are looking for more FF miles and others find better pricing, especially if they have deals with major USA based air carriers.
Then you have the poor overall economic position of most USA carriers that limits their ability to purchase or lease new aircraft.
 
SSRJ
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 6:28 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 12:33 am

Why haven't U.S. airlines ordered A380?

Doesn't fit their business models.  Big grin

(ok, stupid answer but a right answer)
When all else fails, read the directions. Else then, get the hammer
 
sstsomeday
Posts: 821
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 1:05 am

Quoting Cessna057 (Reply 1):
many US carriers want both point to point routes and more frequencies on them versus hub to hub routes onces a day or less.

 checkmark 

Quoting Philly phlyer (Reply 5):
The US carriers are not buying the 380 for the same reason most of them don't operate 747s (and won't buy the 748), it is too big and no longer fits the business model that has evolved for the US carriers. In the US market, the flying public wants frequency and convenience, not a limited number of flights between hubs.

 checkmark 

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 4):
US airlines hubs are not positioned to collect traffic from much more than the US and parts of Canada and Mexico. And most Americans don't want to be forced to go through LAX or JFK to get somewhere internationally.



Quoting Par13del (Reply 10):
To make a long story short, the US happens to be a very large land mass, hence multiple large airports abound, de-centralization was inevitable.

Yes, I think U.S Geography is key to this debate. The population is spread over a wide area. If you live far from a major hub in the U.S., chances are you live closer to another hub or secondary hub. So you will fly direct from that airport, rather than have to connect through the major hub. Whereas in France, most of the intercontinental traffic as funneled through Paris, in the U.S. the populations and centers are spread out.

Also, because of this decentralisation of the market, American airlines need to utilize their intercontinental A/C between a number of different points and markets, rather than always through one mega-center. Smaller A/C are more flexible in this regard.

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 4):
I think the era of the overvalued dollar from 1997 to 2002 magnified that problem and forced a lot of US airlines to retreat into the US domestic market and let their international alliance partners carry more of the international traffic.

That is very interesting. I have often wondered why foreign carriers seemed to carry the lion's share or International traffic to and from the U.S. I thought it also had to do with bilateral agreements; since U.S. carriers are better positioned to connect travellers to many other American points, therefore foreign carriers are given more access to International routes?

But I have heard/seen that this is now changing, with regard to American carriers retreating to their domestic routes. They are now considering International routes as areas for expansion, while giving more domestic market share away to the LLCs. The LLCs are not infringing on their International turf as much.
I come in peace
 
FWAERJ
Posts: 2571
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 1:23 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 2:04 am

The reason why no US carrier has ordered the A380 is because the US market is moving in the opposite direction of the WhaleJet. Airlines here want smaller jets for overseas routes, not bigger ones... for example, NW will probably fly new routes to Asia with the Boeing 787 that will bypass their NRT hub. When Americans want to fly overseas, they want fewer stops on smaller planes, not more stops on bigger planes.

Given the trend toward smaller planes, I think if EMBRAER or Bombardier could build an RJ with transatlantic range, the US carriers would buy it in a heartbeat. After all, we use RJs for almost everything else now in the States...
"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 2:52 am

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 16):
That is very interesting. I have often wondered why foreign carriers seemed to carry the lion's share or International traffic to and from the U.S. I thought it also had to do with bilateral agreements; since U.S. carriers are better positioned to connect travellers to many other American points, therefore foreign carriers are given more access to International routes?

It was the only thing they could do with their high labor costs. Labor represented such a huge cost for US airlines compared to fuel before the increase in oil prices, that faster jets like the sonic cruiser offered a way to reduce total costs while holding fuel costs steady. But with the weaker dollar in relation to the Euro, US carriers are economically more competitive with European carriers now with regards to labor.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 17):
Given the trend toward smaller planes, I think if EMBRAER or Bombardier could build an RJ with transatlantic range, the US carriers would buy it in a heartbeat. After all, we use RJs for almost everything else now in the States...

I doubt that. Most people don't want to be cooped up in that tiny of a jet for more than 3 hours.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
YYCowboy
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:18 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 3:15 am

Interesting thread, excellent replies. The US case for aircraft demand is mirrored in Canada, albiet, a smaller scale. E190's and CRJ's have opened up a whole new world for the average sized Canadian city. International overseas service from all the major cities gives many choices. Like our US neibours, we require frequency and choice. 380 unloading into customs = aneurisim, noooo thankyou, great for spotting though.
Its hard to soar like an eagle when you're flying with turkeys
 
acabgd
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:55 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 4:34 am

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 4):
most Americans don't want to be forced to go through LAX or JFK to get somewhere internationally.



Quoting Par13del (Reply 10):
To make a long story short, the US happens to be a very large land mass, hence multiple large airports abound, de-centralization was inevitable.



Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 14):
would also add that many in the USA who will be flying where the A-380 will be mainly used may perfer the much higher quality in flight service of foreign airlines like SQ. Such levels of service attracts a lot more long haul premium passangers than USA based airlines can. Of course, those non-USA airlines can afford larger staffing and superior service due to much lower labor costs from their bases.



Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 4):
I think the era of the overvalued dollar from 1997 to 2002 magnified that problem and forced a lot of US airlines to retreat into the US domestic market and let their international alliance partners carry more of the international traffic.

Being the original poster of this thread I really want to thank everyone for excellent explanations and analysis. I singled out a few replies I find summarize his situation best - but want as well to thank all the others for their contribution.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 12):
Before the OP tries to paint the USA as the outcast

Not at all and I really don't know where you found that. I singled out the US in this question because it's the largest single market in the World, yet there is no US airline ordering the A380.

If I asked why AZ is not buying the A380, would you flame me for painting Italy as an outcast, or somply reply citing AZ financial troubles, small market size etc? Sad to see you trying to paint *my question* as anti-American in replies 3 and 12, while the others gave excellent contribution to this thread.
CSud,D9,MD8x,D10,Trid,BAC1,A30,31,319,320,321,33,346,B71,72,73,74,75,76,77,L10,S20,A42,A72,T13,T15,F50,F70,F100,B146
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 4:37 am

Quoting Cessna057 (Reply 1):
For one thing there jus isnt quite the demand to throw a 555 pax plane from LAX to SIN or JFK to DXB / JNB.

 checkmark   checkmark 

Quoting Cessna057 (Reply 1):
many US carriers want both point to point routes and more frequencies on them versus hub to hub routes onces a day or less.

Thats actually true. I have read somewhere on the forums last year that the A380 wasnt really designed for the U.S. market. Id look for the thread but it never works.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 5:02 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 12):
The UK is also good in this regard

No it isn't, the UK is very centralised on London and LHR. BA only have one long haul flight outside of LHR or LGW and most of them from LGW are down to Bermuda II. VS are no better either.

BA should have opened a secondary hub in MAN if you ask me. Ala LH in MUC.

The LCCs are good though.
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 5:27 am

Quoting Acabgd (Thread starter):
Why wouldn't the US airlines fly direct from JFK to DXB, JNB, or from LAX to BKK, SIN... with an A380 while on the other hand other international carriers have high loads on these routes?

I think you should have choosen some better examples for your argument.

1. Dubai -- Americans do not want to go to any gulf country. Recent immigrants maybe do but they would need a transfer to a country like Jordan, and Emerites got Dubai covered.

2. South African is no longer a tourist destination for Americans, and you'd never fill an A380 full of expatriots from the U.S.

3. Bankok? Thai Airlines got this covered, and another A380 on that route would insure no profits for anyone.

4. Singapore. I think Singapore airlines got that covered. Besides, without a Hub in Singapore the O/D market would not work for U.S. airlines.

I think maybe an A380 would work for UA from LHR to SFO, but UA seems to enjoy swapping 747's with 777's and adjusting the plane to fit the load.
 
UALMMFlyer
Posts: 120
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 8:51 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 9:53 am

US air traffic is fragmented by six international carriers (AA, UA, DL, NW, CO and US). Most of the carriers that order the A380 are from countries with one single national carrier or operated out of the slot restricted hub. EK, SQ, AF, LH, TG, MH, VS to name a few. KE, CZ and the Indian beer-airline (Sorry! not try to be funny... I forgot the name) are exceptions.

Take London as an example, all six US carriers fly to London (LHR and LGW) with multiple frequecies from their hubs. In the slow seasons, they are able to cut frequecies to manage loads and cost.
Treat others like you'd like to be treated!
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:05 am

Quoting Philly phlyer (Reply 5):
The US carriers are not buying the 380 for the same reason most of them don't operate 747s (and won't buy the 748), it is too big and no longer fits the business model that has evolved for the US carriers. In the US market, the flying public wants frequency and convenience, not a limited number of flights between hubs.

Doesn't Northwest still fly to the Pacific and wouldn't the A380 fit well into their routes there? Although Northwest is the only airline I can feature using the A380, of the US lines, I'm reluctant to rule out their future use of the airplane ... and the 747-800 as well.
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:07 am

Quoting UALMMFlyer (Reply 24):
and the Indian beer-airline (Sorry! not try to be funny... I forgot the name) are exceptions.

Kingfisher or IT for short.... Smile
"Up the Irons!"
 
ChiGB1973
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 6:39 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:21 am

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 25):
Doesn't Northwest still fly to the Pacific and wouldn't the A380 fit well into their routes there? Although Northwest is the only airline I can feature using the A380, of the US lines, I'm reluctant to rule out their future use of the airplane ... and the 747-800 as well.

From which gateway? MSP, DTW, LAX, HNL, SFO, JFK, PDX or SEA. Just by looking at this list, NW would not need anything larger than a 747 and will probably move to something smaller.

With the DC-10 headed out, I understand NW has pulled a few 747s out of storage. I think this is because they are the most readily available. Once the A333/332 fleet builds and the 787s start to arrive, the 747 is history in the NW passenger fleet.

M
 
baron95
Posts: 1106
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 10:19 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 11:00 am

Lets see....

Singapore has a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international airport and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

UAE has a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international airport and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

Quatar has a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international airport and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

South Korea has a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul internationl airport and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

England has a total of 2 (TWO) long-haul international airports and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.


France has a total of 2 (TWO) long-haul international airports and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

etc, etc, etc...

The US has over 12 (ONE DOZEN) significant long-haul international airports and at least 5 FIVE significant long-haul international carriers (AA, DL, CO, UA, NW)

Can't you figure it out by yourself, that with a dozen+ international airports served by 5+ international carriers, it is a much more fragmented and competitive market that SG flying out of SIN?

A380s do not belong on US carriers. Even FX and UPX are figuring that out now.
Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
 
centrair
Posts: 2845
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 11:29 am

First of all Awesome Thread. Acabgd I like that you thanked people for contributing. Always nice when the thread starter does that.

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 25):
Doesn't Northwest still fly to the Pacific and wouldn't the A380 fit well into their routes there? Although Northwest is the only airline I can feature using the A380, of the US lines, I'm reluctant to rule out their future use of the airplane ... and the 747-800 as well.

hmmm
I don't see NW going for either the 747-8 or the A380.

I think NW will do the following.
1) Replace 744s with 773ERs for use solely on high-demand routes through NRT.
2) Take advatage of their 5th freedom rights to enter new markets from Japan via new cities. example. DTW-FUK-(someplace in Asia) and DTW-CTS-(someplace in Asia). These cities cannot support large aircraft like the 744 or 773. We could also see increase use of NGO or KIX.
3) Overfly Japan using 787s from DTW, MSP or other city (SEA) to ICN, HKG, MNL, TPE, PVG (rights pending)
4) Frequency to certain destinations using the 787.
5) Open up new US non-stops to Asia from places like BOS.

Remember NW has 18 787s and 50 options on order. That is a lot of aircrafts. Some could be converted to say the 773ER which would be within pilot contracts. I think NW is going to be making lots of moves that change the landscape of US carriers in Asia. NW wants to remain a leader and pioneer in Asia. They are very proud of it. Also remember NW doesn't really like competition and will do anything to keep control. The A380 and even the 747-8 may not fit that new model. That being said, NW will probably order the 747-8F to replace older 742Fs and then convert some 744s to BCFs
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
vv701
Posts: 5773
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 1:15 pm

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
UAE has a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international airport and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

But two UAE airlines, Emirates and Etihad, have ordered the 380 and both have a fleet that currently includes the 773, 330 and 340.

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
England has a total of 2 (TWO) long-haul international airports and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

Here are photos of US airlines aircraft on scheduled flights to just 7 of the 2 long-haul international airports:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark McEwan
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Marlow - WorldAirImages



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © P R D Jones
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Simon Gregory - Jetwash Images



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Terry Wade
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Glenn Beasley



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © A J Best


and of six different British airline's aircraft taken at various of their long haul destinations in the USA:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tobias Rose - AirTeamImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Manas Barooah



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Marko Kinnunen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alireza Alivandivafa



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kyle Matson - Rocky Mountain AvPhotos
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Justin Idle

 
Cessna057
Posts: 417
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:24 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 1:32 pm

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
Singapore has a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international airport and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

First off, Singapore is about the size of my pinky nail, and on that pinky nail is one airport. I think if there was another airline there then they both would go out of buisness because the demand isnt there for 2 (two)  Wink carriers. Same with Korea. If we (Americans) wanted hub to hub service once a day, by all means there is the market, but thats not what we want. we're lazy we want to get on one plane and have it take us to where we want to go. Like I had stated previsously, thats why we have planes such as the 787 coming into service because it can pick us up at an airport we live by and drop us right where we want to go.

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
England has a total of 2 (TWO) long-haul international airports and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

How do you figure 2? CO has flights going into london, birmingham, bristol and manchester. thats for just for CO. Now I'll admit they arent huge cities, but they still house long haul flights.
Hold it . . . Hold it . . . HOLD THE FREAKIN NOSE UP!!
 
mbj2000
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:15 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:01 am

Very interesting thread indeed.
The explanations I've read so far all make sense, but no one considered a new factor in this game: the merger fever in the last months and weeks, we may see in the near future all legacy US airlines melting down into maybe 2 or 3 big ones.
A consolidation of the hubs could then be the next step and a 'Superjumbo' fleet in the US suddenly makes sense again...

just my 2 cents
Like most of life's problems, this one can be solved with bending -- Bender Unit 22
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:18 am

Quoting MBJ2000 (Reply 32):
Very interesting thread indeed.
The explanations I've read so far all make sense, but no one considered a new factor in this game: the merger fever in the last months and weeks, we may see in the near future all legacy US airlines melting down into maybe 2 or 3 big ones.
A consolidation of the hubs could then be the next step and a 'Superjumbo' fleet in the US suddenly makes sense again...

just my 2 cents

No way. I like my choice of 10 or 12 different times to depart to wherever I want to go to. I love going from the airport nearest me non-stop to the airport nearest where I want to be. I don't understand why Europeans love to go from decent size cities like Hamburg and stop 3 or 4 hours in a city like London and go through security again to get to where they want to go. Maybe its a cultural thing. Maybe Europeans love hanging around at airports to spot planes.
 
PlaneHunter
Posts: 6512
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:17 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:56 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 12):
And EK buying it certainly doesn't prove much. EK seems to buy EVERYTHING and in large numbers.

EK's success speaks for itself - we shouldn't forget they have almost 100 widebodies and they don't have problems with filling both cabins and bellies. And if you check their fleet you'll soon find out they definitely don't "buy EVERYTHING".


PH
Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
 
b737700doctor
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:06 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:23 am

The US have more large cities spread out by thousands of miles, people want more options not just one or two. The 380 works in small countries where they can use a hub system or were the population is very large in a particular geographic area. We Americans like to have many different carriers and options to chose from. This is why Boeing built the 777 and 787 and Airbus the 330. More point to point flying.
Boeings are the best built planes
 
bond007
Posts: 4423
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:07 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:26 am

Quoting Cessna057 (Reply 1):
Also, as you had said, many US carriers want both point to point routes and more frequencies on them versus hub to hub routes onces a day or less.

Maybe, but that isn't happening a lot. It's largely based on hub-spoke design.

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 33):
I like my choice of 10 or 12 different times to depart to wherever I want to go to. I love going from the airport nearest me non-stop to the airport nearest where I want to be. I don't understand why Europeans love to go from decent size cities like Hamburg and stop 3 or 4 hours in a city like London and go through security again to get to where they want to go. Maybe its a cultural thing.

Fair enough, but that has little to do with the geography of the US vs Europe. Cut down the frequency of some of the USA flights and you could easily fill an A380. Same with Europe, increase the frequency from some of the cities and you could use much smaller aircraft ... simple math.

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 16):
Yes, I think U.S Geography is key to this debate. The population is spread over a wide area. If you live far from a major hub in the U.S., chances are you live closer to another hub or secondary hub. So you will fly direct from that airport, rather than have to connect through the major hub. Whereas in France, most of the intercontinental traffic as funneled through Paris, in the U.S. the populations and centers are spread out.

I'm still not convinced this is the reason. The US airline industry has moved toward high frequency and smaller aircraft ... the rest of the world could in theory have gone a similar way (I know it's not a good comparison maybe). There is no reason that for the longer routes, fewer frequencies can be offered, and larger aircraft used. Do the US passengers really demand hourly or half-hourly flights between major cities, or do we just think it's great because they do? Is it so great that you can fly at 6:00pm, 7:00pm and 8:00pm, instead of getting one 7:15pm flight at perhaps a lower cost? Hey, maybe it is better, but just asking the question. would we rather they cut out half the flights and flew to different cities but at lower frequencies ... I know I would?

Remember it's not just geography that was the reason that Boeing hasn't designed a 700 seat aircraft.

Let's take a look in 10 years time - Airbus will be making 20 seat turboprops, and we'll be flying A380s between LGA and DCA .... funny things happen in this industry. RJ's started as 30-40 seaters ... now they are over 100 seats!




Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:41 am

Quoting Bond007 (Reply 36):
Fair enough, but that has little to do with the geography of the US vs Europe. Cut down the frequency of some of the USA flights and you could easily fill an A380. Same with Europe, increase the frequency from some of the cities and you could use much smaller aircraft ... simple math.

This is what will happen in the US if you cut frequency and try to fill an A380. Let's take LA - NY for example. Let's say an airline schedules an A380 to depart at 10:00 AM from LA. Well guess what? Some smart ass Airline will decide to use a smaller craft at 8:00 AM and Another one at 11:00 AM, bracketing the 10:00 departure time of their competitor and the A380 will end up departing only 1/2 full, because some of the people want earlier departure time and some want later departure time. This is what happened to the 747, and this will happen to a certain extent to the A380. It will be real interesting to watch which routes can sustain the A380 internationally. Guarantee, as soon as Smart-Ass airlines gets wind of an A380 route being consistantly full they will bracket the A380's departure time and/or try to grab passengers who are not really flying from the HUB to the other HUB but are going somewhere else.

I notice Europeans seem to always make the argument that departure time is not so important internationally, but at work here I noticed when three of us went to Europe, and all three of us decided on different departure times due to work load and sleeping habits.
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:42 am

Quoting Acabgd (Reply 20):
Not at all and I really don't know where you found that. I singled out the US in this question because it's the largest single market in the World, yet there is no US airline ordering the A380.

If I asked why AZ is not buying the A380, would you flame me for painting Italy as an outcast, or somply reply citing AZ financial troubles, small market size etc? Sad to see you trying to paint *my question* as anti-American in replies 3 and 12, while the others gave excellent contribution to this thread.

Your question posed initially did seem to single out the US:

Quoting Acabgd (Thread starter):
In previous topics many said that US carriers want more flights and choices for their passengers, than one flight daily to a certain destination. However, it seems that most of the rest of the World disagrees and is happy to order the A380 to fly to, say, JFK or LAX.

No offense, but "most of the rest of the World" does NOT disagree. Some of the largest countries in the World (in terms of land mass) have not ordered the A380. Canada, Russia, and the US are but some of them. Some of the most populous countries in the world have not ordered them: Japan, Brazil, Indonesia.

New Zealand, Mexico, Spain, Italy, the list can go on in regards to countries whose airlines have not ordered the A380.

Perhaps that is why someone misconstrued your effort to single out the USA vs. the "rest of the World".

But I agree, this has been an interesting thread....
 
777FlyGuy
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 12:29 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:28 am

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 34):
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 12):
And EK buying it certainly doesn't prove much. EK seems to buy EVERYTHING and in large numbers.

EK's success speaks for itself - we shouldn't forget they have almost 100 widebodies and they don't have problems with filling both cabins and bellies. And if you check their fleet you'll soon find out they definitely don't "buy EVERYTHING".

So, what happens if, God forbid, there is another 9/11 type attack, another SARS type outbreak, the Iraq war spills across borders in the middle east and enflames a regional conflict, and the world's economy in general takes a dive for a few years? All those EK widebodies might look pretty sitting at Dubai's new airport, but if they can't fill them with paying passengers, the whole order-mania was just folly was it not? I can't beleive they actually forsee a need for that many seats in their future.

As for the topic thread, why don't US carriers purchase the 380? For the most part, they have the sense to see the big picture, aside from certain merger happy execs. Otherwise, don't look for this bad boy flying a US flag (unless UPS keeps their order).
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:47 am

Quoting Bond007 (Reply 36):
Cut down the frequency of some of the USA flights and you could easily fill an A380.

Yes, you could. But US passengers don't want low frequency and large airplanes. AA, UA, and TW tried that once, with 747's departing LAX to JFK all at about the same time each day. That was a real success, wasn't it?

Quoting Bond007 (Reply 36):
Do the US passengers really demand hourly or half-hourly flights between major cities, or do we just think it's great because they do? Is it so great that you can fly at 6:00pm, 7:00pm and 8:00pm, instead of getting one 7:15pm flight at perhaps a lower cost? Hey, maybe it is better, but just asking the question. would we rather they cut out half the flights and flew to different cities but at lower frequencies ... I know I would?

I really appreciate the high frequency of flights between IAD and the west coast. I'd hate it if UA cut the number of flights and put us on larger aircraft.

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 37):
Let's take LA - NY for example. Let's say an airline schedules an A380 to depart at 10:00 AM from LA. Well guess what? Some smart ass Airline will decide to use a smaller craft at 8:00 AM and Another one at 11:00 AM, bracketing the 10:00 departure time of their competitor and the A380 will end up departing only 1/2 full, because some of the people want earlier departure time and some want later departure time. This is what happened to the 747, and this will happen to a certain extent to the A380.

Yep. The first US carrier that tries to purchase an A380 will soon find that the competition will eat them for lunch.

I'd bet that UA would gladly trade their 744's for 777's if you asked them.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
User avatar
airzim
Posts: 1207
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2001 7:40 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:58 am

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
South Korea has a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul internationl airport and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

I guess Asiana and Korean Air would be surprised by that?
 
rampart
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:17 am

Quoting Acabgd (Reply 20):
Being the original poster of this thread I really want to thank everyone for excellent explanations and analysis. I singled out a few replies I find summarize his situation best - but want as well to thank all the others for their contribution.

I agree, this was very informative and, thankfully, not very combative (relatively speaking). So long as the "singled out" question is smoothed over, I think we have a well-answered question.

-Rampart
 
PlaneHunter
Posts: 6512
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:17 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 5:21 am

Quoting 777FlyGuy (Reply 39):
So, what happens if, God forbid, there is another 9/11 type attack, another SARS type outbreak, the Iraq war spills across borders in the middle east and enflames a regional conflict, and the world's economy in general takes a dive for a few years?

In contrast to many other carriers EK never stopped growing during these crises.

Quoting 777FlyGuy (Reply 39):
I can't beleive they actually forsee a need for that many seats in their future.

Just like many people couldn't imagine during the first Gulf War that this tiny unimportant carrier would operate 100 widebodies only 15 years later.

Quoting 777FlyGuy (Reply 39):
As for the topic thread, why don't US carriers purchase the 380? For the most part, they have the sense to see the big picture,

And these non-US carriers with A380s on order which have been extremely profitable over the past years don't see the "big picture"?

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
UAE has a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international airport and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

Wrong.

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
South Korea has a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul internationl airport and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

Wrong.

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
England has a total of 2 (TWO) long-haul international airports and a total of 1 (ONE) long-haul international national carriers.

Wrong.

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
The US has over 12 (ONE DOZEN) significant long-haul international airports and at least 5 FIVE significant long-haul international carriers (AA, DL, CO, UA, NW)

The country significantly larger and more populated than all the others.

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
it is a much more fragmented and competitive market that SG flying out of SIN?

Within the EU any EU-based carrier can fly from anywhere.

Btw - Jetsgo is out of business and has never flown to SIN.  Wink

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
A380s do not belong on US carriers. Even FX and UPX are figuring that out now.

Let's wait and see.


PH
Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
 
bond007
Posts: 4423
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:07 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 5:44 am

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 43):
Wrong.

I'm not disagreeing, but that is a completely useless reply without explaining why!


Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
 
PlaneHunter
Posts: 6512
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:17 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 5:53 am

Quoting Bond007 (Reply 44):
I'm not disagreeing, but that is a completely useless reply without explaining why!

I don't always waste my time for posting obvious stuff which the very users could find out by simply entering two words into a search engine.


PH
Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
 
acabgd
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:55 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 8:42 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 40):
But US passengers don't want low frequency and large airplanes

OK, so the real question is - can the A380 lower the ticket prices by so much, that it wouldn't really matter at what time of the day you fly, provided you have a choice of morning and evening flight?
CSud,D9,MD8x,D10,Trid,BAC1,A30,31,319,320,321,33,346,B71,72,73,74,75,76,77,L10,S20,A42,A72,T13,T15,F50,F70,F100,B146
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 8:53 am

Quoting Acabgd (Reply 46):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 40):
But US passengers don't want low frequency and large airplanes

OK, so the real question is - can the A380 lower the ticket prices by so much, that it wouldn't really matter at what time of the day you fly, provided you have a choice of morning and evening flight?

I doubt it. I fly from IAD to the west coast frequently, and in almost every instance, I fly at a different time, depending on my schedule in DC on the day of departure and on the west coast when I arrive.

The legacies couldn't make the 747 work across the US - what makes you think it will be any easier with an A380?

Case in point. I flew the day after thanksgiving, and first class was virtually empty. going back tomorrow, it will be packed. Business travelers want convenience, not just low fares.

You don't see JetBlue and Southwest using widebody aircraft, do you? If a large aircraft can't be filled with business travelers, and the LCC's obviously can't fill them either, who can?
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
777FlyGuy
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 12:29 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:18 am

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 43):
And these non-US carriers with A380s on order which have been extremely profitable over the past years don't see the "big picture"?

US carriers don't rely on niche routes as much as non-US carriers do. I can't see this a/c being much more than that. Get back to me in three or so years and we'll see which prognostication is closer.
 
jfk777
Posts: 5812
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: US Carriers - Missing On A380 And Intl Routes?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:57 am

A380 is clearly an Asia-Pacific airplane. Qantas and Singapore are the two larger users. USA airlines, even with big Asian ops(AT least to Tokyo), probably will not order it. UA could with its Australian and Hong Kong flights and even FRA & LHR. AA could to GRU and EZE with some JFK to LHR flights but probably won't just to keep the fleet simple. 773ER and 787 are teh future at big us airlines.

Who is online