incitatus wrote:

Very interesting to compare the photo of the OP with Google maps. The two A380s already show on the Google maps photo, and there is a third white-tail A380 at the southern end of the tarmac.

incitatus wrote:

Very interesting to compare the photo of the OP with Google maps. The two A380s already show on the Google maps photo, and there is a third white-tail A380 at the southern end of the tarmac.

There are already four Airbus A380s parked at the Aéroport de Tarbes-Lourdes-Pyrénées.

Two of the giant planes were mothballed by Tarmac Aerosave so that they can fly again at any time. Two others are certain death.

Btblue wrote:

These are early builds though that have bespoke wiring and corrections so not as per mainstream builds? Making them less attractive in terms of maintaining etc?

I’d love to know the cost of these worked out over per flight.

zeke wrote:

Who paid $600 million for them ?

Channex757 wrote:

Dr Peters won't be losing any money on them.

Revelation wrote:

Channex757 wrote:

Dr Peters won't be losing any money on them.

Too bad Airbus can't say the same thing.

Sancho99504 wrote:

zeke wrote:

Who paid $600 million for them ?

When SQ bought them, they listed for something like $325 million. Don't know how much SQ paid for each frame, but it was just an estimate.

Sancho99504 wrote:

When SQ bought them, they listed for something like $325 million. Don't know how much SQ paid for each frame, but it was just an estimate.

zeke wrote:

Sancho99504 wrote:

When SQ bought them, they listed for something like $325 million. Don't know how much SQ paid for each frame, but it was just an estimate.

These aircraft were owned by the Dr Peters Group hence the reason they were returned to Dr Peters group end of lease.

I don’t remember the price DS Fund No. 129 etc paid for each A380, however it was not 300-600 million. The perspective should still be available online.

They expect to get 45 million for the airframe parts, I heard the engine were leased back to RR and still generating revenue for the fund. When sold they should bring in about 5 million each.

Sancho99504 wrote:

Thanks for the info. For some reason, I thought they did a sale/lease back with Dr Peters.

Slash787 wrote:

Iran Air could have used these planes

zeke wrote:

Sancho99504 wrote:

Thanks for the info. For some reason, I thought they did a sale/lease back with Dr Peters.

This document says they paid 154 and 156 million respectively for the aircraft.

https://www.nuertingen.versicherung/eh- ... -DS140.pdf

Should get 45 million for the airframe and 20 million for the engines.

Dr. Peters Group expects an overall return of 145 to 155 per cent for investors in DS funds 129 and 130 after that.

jfk777 wrote:

Slash787 wrote:

Iran Air could have used these planes

What market does Iran Air have that can sell 600, 700 or 800 seats ? None I can think of, Iran Air would also have a huge y cabin and small J cabin. An A380 is too big and too complicated for Iran Air, does Tehran even have any A380 capable gates ? There are few if any good airlines for used A380's, it works well for airlines with large J class cabins but dogs when those J seats are replaced with Y seats and the seat count goes to 700 or more.

Channex757 wrote:

They could not be remarketed successfully as they were way too nonstandard. Individual certificates were needed for them, and that makes insurance costs alone scary.

Just like those 787 prototypes. Insurers look on nonstandard fixtures and fittings as additional risk. That's before contemplating the overweight issue.

Dr Peters won't be losing any money on them. Tax writeoffs and a completed lease should have nicely covered their costs together with a healthy discount from Airbus.

vhtje wrote:

I wonder how much revenue SQ earned from these aircraft during their tenure with SQ?

zeke wrote:

Dr. Peters Group expects an overall return of 145 to 155 per cent for investors in DS funds 129 and 130 after that.

travelhound wrote:

SQ probably paid an amount to Dr Peters on return for maintenance and refurb. This amount could be added to the value of the funds.

LAXintl wrote:

And so it begins...

Dr. Peters has begun disassembly scrapping of two ex-SIA A380s into parts at Tarmac Aerosave in Tarbes France.
The Dortmund-based financial company predicts proceeds of approximately USD $45 million for the parts.



https://www.aerotelegraph.com/jetzt-wer ... 80-zerlegt

=

zeke wrote:

That link I posted above I think said 7.5% PA, it is more like 2% now with just the engine lease.

parapente wrote:

Flew in and out of this airport about 6 weeks ago.What struck me was the rows and rows of Airbus - all quads - all the different shapes and sizes ( inc 380).Such an odd decision to continue developing them over and over again.Their first ( hairdryer) model yup ok there was fair logic ( and enough-just- sales).But beyond this? The writing was there for all to see.
The A300/310/330/NEO have been a magnificent family of aircaft.But how much better might they have been had they poured their considerable resources into this WB twin concept which ironically Airbus pioneered in the first place.Somewhat perverse imho.

parapente wrote:

Flew in and out of this airport about 6 weeks ago.What struck me was the rows and rows of Airbus - all quads - all the different shapes and sizes ( inc 380).Such an odd decision to continue developing them over and over again.Their first ( hairdryer) model yup ok there was fair logic ( and enough-just- sales).But beyond this? The writing was there for all to see.
The A300/310/330/NEO have been a magnificent family of aircaft.But how much better might they have been had they poured their considerable resources into this WB twin concept which ironically Airbus pioneered in the first place.Somewhat perverse imho.

lightsaber wrote:

parapente wrote:

Flew in and out of this airport about 6 weeks ago.What struck me was the rows and rows of Airbus - all quads - all the different shapes and sizes ( inc 380).Such an odd decision to continue developing them over and over again.Their first ( hairdryer) model yup ok there was fair logic ( and enough-just- sales).But beyond this? The writing was there for all to see.
The A300/310/330/NEO have been a magnificent family of aircaft.But how much better might they have been had they poured their considerable resources into this WB twin concept which ironically Airbus pioneered in the first place.Somewhat perverse imho.

At the time of the A380 launch, I was working the A305, a very 787 like plane, but less range as it was advanced aluminum instead of CFRP and an A320 re-engine for TATL range on the A321.

Obviously the A380 camp won.

parapente wrote:

I was once told by a commercial pilot that he was told ( yes I know!) that Airbus had severe reservations about 'one engine out' performance at take off for giant twins.Not enough rudder authority.Whether this is true or not who knows.

I also thought I read here somewhere at GE did indeed offer them the GE90 but again could be wrong.

GE, he says, would have paid for the development of putting the GE 90 on an A330. I can remember [Airbus] just rolling their eyes, saying ‘no, why would we want to do that?

frmrCapCadet wrote:

How about a 'Cruise Ship' version, going around the world with one and two day stopovers, with hotels and for crew rests. I might spring for one such extravagant vacation. Always east bound with the wind. Economy Comfort for us plebeians, varying routes, north and south of the equator, choose a route whose stops appeal to you.

747-600X wrote:

The Google Maps satellite view shows the 2 in the photograph in the original post as well as a third, parked elsewhere. The picture includes many other aircraft, almost all Airbuses. One stand has an A350 and a 777-200, both without engines...

Awaiting to be demolished at LDE