But even so, the 777X may have a space to itself, and I think Airbus recognizes that...hence, the thread about Airbus ALREADY hiring people for an A350NEO study; I think they are loading up to prevent the 777X-series from gobbling up sales in the mid-2020's, and apparently got the papers on the 777x and want a response ready.
I wonder where they think they can take the A350 family. I would imagine UltraFan would be the most likely engine candidate. Airbus and Rolls-Royce sign UltraFan engine integration collaboration agreement
Axel Flaig, Airbus Head of Research and Technology, said: “This technology development programme with Rolls-Royce is a key project for Airbus to pave the way towards the next generation integrated propulsion systems that will be needed by airline customers towards the end of the next decade. We thank the Clean Sky 2 European funding programme for its strong support to this project which is a key contributor towards the ACARE environmental targets.”
It seems a bit early, but I guess it's time to get staff rolling on that project.
In a more perfect world, 787 would have tracked to a much more acceptable development timeline, and we'd see the proposed clean sheet Y3 rolling out in the same time frame as 777X. If that were the case they could have optimized the platform to be a more perfectly sized and more optimized 777 replacement. Instead 787 took up a lot more resources than planned and we have got the 777x instead.
I guess I question whether the 77X is Y3
. Y2 is the 787 AFAIK. The 77X is a 777neo. Y1 (and Y0.5) is NSA, built in cooperation with Embraer. The 797 is a new animal that was never part of that plan; a Y1.5 if you will. Y3 is a good bit down the road? Something else to replace the 77X, probably once the 748F / KC-767A lines come to a stop?
Sorry if I didn't make it clear, but I was trying to say that instead of 777X ( = 777 + neo + nwo ) we could/should? have been getting ( clean sheet ) Y3 instead.
As above, Airbus thinks so much of their ability to undermine 777X that they're already doing A350neo advance work.
I think part of the reason why is their early work shows them they really can undercut it with an engine such as UltraFan that is matched perfectly to the ( excellent ) A350 design.
If oil prices stay below 100 USD per barrel, it makes sense to operate the A380 like hell during the high seasons and to park some of them during the winter.
That's what low capital costs allows you to do.
No, it doesn't.
If it did, over the past decade or so we'd see scores of 744s operating the high seasons and being parked in the off season.
Instead we saw 744s migrate to the boneyard, or to charter/ACMI roles that don't make much money, just like we saw the first A380 migrate to HiFly.
How dare they make so much money with tired old B717's, B767's and B772ER's and now even "useless" A330neo's?
According to airliners.net wisdom, fuel burn is everything, capital cost is an accessory.
Yet against that wisdom, DL are the most profitable in the business.
They can do that because they have a thriving MRO outfit and can utilize it without paying street prices. Not many have that, even the other US legacies have wound down or spun off much of their MRO operations, thus the preference for relatively new aircraft with better efficiency and lower maintenance costs to offset the capital costs. What DL does is admirable, but it's been a part of the company they've had to invest in continuously, and new operators can't afford to ramp that up at the same time they ramp up their airline business. Think of how much it would cost a new entrant just to build a hangar at many of the airports DL has facilities at. Then consider what it'd cost to acquire the mechanics, the tools, the licenses, the training, etc. It's just a non-starter for new entrants. Also consider how the engine and airframe vendors are pushing power by the hour and the leasing community is insisting on it being written into leases. DL is already a rarity, and they are finding themselves challenged because the engine and airframe vendors want to capture the MRO business for themselves with the financial community's support. DL has the clout to keep the MRO side going, but few others do.
Talking about DL, if the used A380*frames are cheap enough, I can see them pick up a few to operate on some routes, at least seasonally.
Who knows, perhaps JFK-LHR could be one of those routes...? BA better watch out.
Not a chance. They could have chosen to keep 744s rolling but they wound that operation down. I don't see them spooling up an A380 operation.
The A380 can make money to Asia from CDG.
You just have to know how to do it and when you can't even make money hubbing at one of the most desirable places in the world, there is something structurally wrong with the airline beyond aircraft purchase decisions.
As written above, you need two strong markets on both sides for the A380 to make money. EK can do that after years of building their network up, not many others can. In particular AF has been reducing rather than growing their network. They do have "structural" issues in the fact that they have to pay crews on Western European union rates. If you could change that, you could change a lot of things about how the airline operates. Since you can't, you have to work with that constraint.