Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10737
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:10 am

Revelation wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Not only that, They said that they will stretch it .
https://leehamnews.com/2014/12/11/airbu ... o-stretch/
We will one day launch an A380neo and one day launch a stretched A380

It's been four years since that statement was made. Bregier no longer works for Airbus. There's no evidence of any such plan taking shape. In fact, we see the opposite. QF has just joined stalwarts such as AF and LH on the list of airlines that have dropped A380 orders. Airbus itself announced that it is discussing A380 contracts with EK. Press reports suggest Enders is trying to wind down the program before he leaves in April. At this point in time, the idea of an A380neo emerging seems fantastical.

Not just Bregier, every Airbus executive mentioned in that post has either left Airbus (Bregier, Leahy) or soon will (Wilhelm).

Airbus will soon have completed a complete leadership overhaul as the “old guard” and those long connected to them have either reached retirement age or were forced out due to fall out from the corruption scandal. This isn’t the Airbus of 2, 3, 4+ years ago...this is a new Airbus. What was a priority/vision 4 years ago may no longer be in play. New leadership may have a different opinion about what losses are “digestible” and what losses are not.
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1528
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:57 am

Stitch wrote:
Planeflyer wrote:
Stitch, do you know this for sure or is this your take on the decision making process?


I cannot speak with direct authority, but at the time Boeing floated Sonic Cruiser, there was an economic bubble in the US and EU driven by venture capital and investment banking IPOs of Internet companies as well as a commodities super cycle. Premium cabins were filled with people traveling between the US, EU and Asia signing eight and nine-figure business deals. Concorde facilitated this by allowing people to literally daily commute between NYC and London to do these deals and Boeing presented Sonic Cruiser as a way to cut hours off these trips.


Planeflyer wrote:
To me the 787 was a continuation of the 767 and 777 both of which fragmented travel flows.


Indeed it was, but a fair bit of that fragmentation still starts or ends at an airline hub. Now it is spoke-hub | hub-spoke instead of spoke-hub-hub | hub-hub-spoke.



Planeflyer wrote:
As a business traveler I love the 380 but would never choose it if I has the option to fly a smaller ac direct. I don’t think I’m at all unique preferring non stops and for the life of me can’t understand how AB missed this.


I don't believe they "missed" it. After all, they had the A330 and A340 which could fragment a travel flow as effectively as a 767 or 777 did. The A380 was meant to service the "mega-hubs" where Airbus believed traffic growth would be artificially constrained due to lack of slots. I mean a lot of people still wanted to fly between New York and London or Los Angeles and Tokyo and those airports were full of 747s because of a lack of slots. What they didn't foresee was those airports expanding and improvements in air traffic control allowing more frequencies which meant that those 747s could be replaced with more smaller frames, not few larger ones.


Planeflyer wrote:
About the only thing that makes sense is JL’s love for the big win mindset and his ability to sell To the C suite.


It was actually Jean Roeder who pushed for making the A380 as large as it was. He was head of a group studying VLAs at Airbus and he believed that Boeing's "747 monopoly" had helped them sell the 737, 757, 767 and 777 and that having a VLA would equally help Airbus move A320s, A330s and A340s. He was the one who convinced Airbus President Jean Pierson and COO Herbert Flossdorf that Airbus needed to be in this market - either as a partner with Boeing or on their own. That being said, I expect he didn't have to hard-sell John Leahy on the idea, either. :lol:


Planeflyer wrote:
Think to his relationships w the ME3 and how this must have influenced his thinking on the market size for the 380.


The funny thing is that when working on the A3XX, the Middle Eastern carriers were not seen as a serious customer because they had so little traffic. Asia is what really drove the A3XX design (as it did the 747X) as the "Tiger Economies" of Southeast Asia were seeing double-digit annual growth in air traffic and their old airports were literally choking on it and Airbus expected airlines like SQ, MH and TG to be the major A3XX customers with the legacy US and EU carriers picking it up to replace their 747s as they came due for replacement.

Tim Clark saw the true potential of the plane and how Emirates could leverage their position in DXB to connect the US and EU with Africa, India and Asia and he is why Emirates went from being one of the smallest initial customers for the type to accounting for some half of all sales.


Really interesting, thanks for the education!
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2257
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:03 am

SEPilot wrote:
I see the A380 as having had the stars lined up against it. First, and most important, Airbus really, really, REALLY wanted to build it so they could snatch some sort of title from Boeing. And that mindset led to several strategic errors in addition to a lack of realism about what the demand for it really would be. The first one was a lack of appreciation for what was coming, I. e the 77W and the 787. That is understandable since nobody really knew. But not knowing led them to be sloppy in optimizing the design for the plane they were building, figuring its size would be enough to make it efficient enough to be attractive. They certainly did not expect that before it was flying that Boeing would have a twin engined plane (the 77W) that would nearly match both its range and economics, or that they would come out with one (the 787) that would actually beat its per seat economics in a much smaller plane. They obviously had watched Boeing for years sell 747s at enormous profits because it had no competition, and were itching not only to give it competition but grab that gravy train for themselves. But by the time they had their plane the gravy train had ended, because it was not the size of the 747 that put it in its own class but its range. And the handwriting was on the wall even before the A380 was launched, that smaller planes were coming that could match or exceed the range of the 747. And so by the time it was flying it’s only real advantage was to airlines flying to slot-constrained airports, and the only airline that really took advantage of that was EK, whose hub was very limited for the number of passengers that they were trying to put through it. Had EK had more hubs they probably would not have bought anywhere nearly as many.

So if the A380 been more optimally designed, with a smaller, lighter wing instead of one optimized around future, and not present, needs, and perhaps a lighter fuselage, would it have been more successful? Probably slightly, but I think it still would be going down in flames now. The 77W, 787, A350 and A330NEO are just simply less risky for most airlines as they are so much easier to fill year round, and their economics are competitive with or even beat the A380s. And when demand is high, you can increase frequency, and reduce it when it slows down. That beats flying the A380 half empty.


In the widebodies, nearly every successful model has been designed as a base model and a payload for range stretch, That allows each component to be designed near optimum or the same for the 2 models. A MTOW increase is usually cashing in some reserves in the initial design.

The A380 was not tightly designed for the 388 requirements, but with lots of 'future', also there is usually a 'natural' gap between models, something like 20% more capacity. To stay closer to familiar territory going above the 744 just by 20% is a lot less risk than a 35% jump. the 380 positioned itself as far larger than the 744, requiring bigger hangers, different gates, far larger insurance costs, new approaches to ticketing, boarding, and baggage. If an A380 is later arriving does the whole hub wait, otherwise so many passengers needing rebooking, etc. If it goes Tech, what a mess.

Only 9 airlines have ordered 10 or more, 3 of those received their first plane after 2012. It is telling that LH, AF, QF, QR, and BA have not done top off orders since 2012. Except for the 20+16 EK order, it has been 5 years since a dozen orders in 1 year. The airlines said by their purchases that they needed other planes instead. It is actually quite sad how they badly missed the sweet spot for that model. In contrast, the 787 was positioned at a good sweet spot, it blocked above the 330 into a position of excellent sales.
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1316
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:21 am

lightsaber wrote:
The trouble with the A388 is only EK found a way to fill it enough on non-trunk routes profitably. I honestly thought more airlines would do so. I guess EK just took their massive hub waves to the next level.

Lightsaber

I think one of the reasons why EK was able to fill their A388s was because they were willing to cut their fares to the extent that even long haul LCCs found it tough to compete against them. They don't do it so often these days as they have established their market. Other airlines were not prepared to go as low with their fares.
 
User avatar
N14AZ
Posts: 4154
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 7:39 am

SEPilot wrote:
First, and most important, Airbus really, really, REALLY wanted to build it so they could snatch some sort of title from Boeing.

First and most important, this is really, really, REALLY nonsense. I apologize for my harsh words but we really should stick to the facts.
SEPilot wrote:
They obviously had watched Boeing for years sell 747s at enormous profits because it had no competition, and were itching not only to give it competition

That’s a better description. I follow aviation long enough to remember the main motivation. I may also add to this description that Airbus felt that Boeing did win some sales campaign for the 737 by crossfinancing from revenues created by the B747.
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 887
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 7:53 am

flyingclrs727 wrote:
Why would demand come back for the A380 in the 2030's? Even if there were demand for a plane larger than a 777-10X, why would any airline want a warmed over 30 tear old design. By now everyone knows a VLA must offer much better CASM than a smaller aircraft in order to compensate for lack of flexibility. There are going to be more efficient engines. A new 11 abreast twin engined plane with CFRP fuselage and wings could dethrone the 777X at the top of the market.


The A320 blows the "warmed-over 30 year old design" theory out of the water.
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5639
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 12:37 pm

N14AZ wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
First, and most important, Airbus really, really, REALLY wanted to build it so they could snatch some sort of title from Boeing.

First and most important, this is really, really, REALLY nonsense. I apologize for my harsh words but we really should stick to the facts.

Come on, you really think that all of Airbus’s rose-colored views of the market were not motivated by a desire to build the biggest plane out there? Especially when Boeing, with access to the same data correctly figured that the market just was not there? I’m sure that there were many at Boeing who were also chomping at the bit (as were people at MD, but they had no resources to pursue it) to build a new, clean-sheet VLA and so keep the crown, but cooler heads prevailed and believed their market studies. I have often said that international diplomacy is conducted on the level of little kids in a sandbox; unfortunately, many decisions in the corporate world are the same. The difference is that in the corporate world the decision makers are restrained by the fact that it is their own money they are dealing with; political leaders do not have the same restraint. And the fact that Airbus had launch aid available, while Boeing did not, undoubtedly was an enabling factor.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
VV
Posts: 1865
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 2:28 pm

Qantas and Emirates are partners.

I that a coincidence the A380 order modifications happen or are discussed almost at the same time?
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1316
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 2:58 pm

VV wrote:
Qantas and Emirates are partners.

I that a coincidence the A380 order modifications happen or are discussed almost at the same time?

Unlikely because Qantas telegraphed their intentions not to take them up a long time ago, before their partnership with Emirates. The cancellation announcement merely confirmed the rumours.
 
SC430
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:45 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 3:38 pm

Think it's time for that other "FIRM" A380 order to be wiped from the books?
 
WIederling
Posts: 9348
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:58 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
And as far as I know, the reason GLARE was ditched was because it was too expensive. (even more expensive than CFRP!)

GLARE was dropped as the cost did not yield as expected. It stayed expensive. ( No idea why.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 9348
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 5:05 pm

flee wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
The trouble with the A388 is only EK found a way to fill it enough on non-trunk routes profitably. I honestly thought more airlines would do so. I guess EK just took their massive hub waves to the next level.

Lightsaber

I think one of the reasons why EK was able to fill their A388s was because they were willing to cut their fares to the extent that even long haul LCCs found it tough to compete against them. They don't do it so often these days as they have established their market. Other airlines were not prepared to go as low with their fares.


I've written this before :
Emirates is two MegaHubs connected by Adidas routing located on the same grounds.
Every P2H finger on one side collects traffic for all fingers on the H2P mirror hub.
you need vastly more traffic to turn this into a viable p2p landscape.
that is why an A380 to places like HAM makes sense.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Dantepel
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2016 4:00 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 5:50 pm

I fully understand the mega hub to mega hub justification for th plane. However I think that the modifications required at airports from hold room size to widening of terminals for egress to gate parking to taxiway/runway separation to taxiway turn radius pavement shoulders etc needed to accommodate the aircraft meant only some airports made the mods. Even then taxiing the aircraft around sometimes has operational impacts. I think this adds to the inflexibility of the aircraft in finding other roles.
 
Vladex
Posts: 475
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:44 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 7:02 pm

Revelation wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Not only that, They said that they will stretch it .
https://leehamnews.com/2014/12/11/airbu ... o-stretch/
We will one day launch an A380neo and one day launch a stretched A380

It's been four years since that statement was made. Bregier no longer works for Airbus. There's no evidence of any such plan taking shape. In fact, we see the opposite. QF has just joined stalwarts such as AF and LH on the list of airlines that have dropped A380 orders. Airbus itself announced that it is discussing A380 contracts with EK. Press reports suggest Enders is trying to wind down the program before he leaves in April. At this point in time, the idea of an A380neo emerging seems fantastical.


The only thing more scary and stupid than keeping the A380 going would be shutting it down. Considering that
1. Anyone buying the biggest airplane would then go to Boeing as the pax growth is double digits each year much like they flock to A321 in the narrowbody segment.
2. Would be the only airplane not to get right sized or stretched properly
3. Rolls Royce engines developments would be worthless and pointless
4. Would lose out on technological developments for other models
5. Would forever be second guessing themselves like some fanboys do on 757

Changing guard can not change basic realities and it can't force long term thinking for short term interests. Unfortunately , economic interests are very short term nowadays.which is why this is even a discussion . I will watch to see as to what happens.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27247
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 7:52 pm

Vladex wrote:
The only thing more scary and stupid than keeping the A380 going would be shutting it down. Considering that:
1. Anyone buying the biggest airplane would then go to Boeing as the pax growth is double digits each year much like they flock to A321 in the narrowbody segment.


The 777-9 may be bigger, but I see the A350-1000 being an immensely popular model over the next two decades.


Vladex wrote:
2. Would be the only airplane not to get right sized or stretched properly


At this point, it is likely too late for that. If airlines can't make the economics work on the current frame due to its size, an even larger one is likely not going to help.


Vladex wrote:
3. Rolls Royce engines developments would be worthless and pointless


Everything RR learned from the Trent 900 went into the Trent 1000 and Trent XWB and the lessons learned on those two powerplants have been rolled back into the Trent 900. So they've already recovered what they will from the 900 series.


Vladex wrote:
4. Would lose out on technological developments for other models


Advance and UltraFan are where RR's engine development resources are being spent and those can power an A330neo, an A350 and/or a 787 just as easily as they could an A380.


Vladex wrote:
5. Would forever be second guessing themselves like some fanboys do on 757


And it would be just as pointless a subject to do so.


Vladex wrote:
Changing guard can not change basic realities and it can't force long term thinking for short term interests. Unfortunately , economic interests are very short term nowadays.which is why this is even a discussion . I will watch to see as to what happens.


If demand dries up for the A380, then Airbus has no reason to keep offering it for sale. And beyond Airbus, all the A380 suppliers will not want to spend money keeping production facilities in mothballs in the hope that maybe someday someone will want to order more.

I would not be surprised if Airbus has made a private "last call" amongst it's A380 customers and received a universal response of "we're good, thanks". Air France, Lufthansa and Qantas have all cancelled their unfilled orders. British Airways is not, IMO, serious about adding to their fleet (at least with new builds) and none of the Asian operators have shown any interest on adding new frames with the exception of Singapore, and I don't believe they will be looking to replace any more now that they have replaced the five earliest "custom-build" frames. Virgin Atlantic has cancelled their order and Airbus will eventually be forced under IFRS 15 to cancel the frames on order from Amedeo and Air Accord as those frames have zero chance of ever being built.
 
Vladex
Posts: 475
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:44 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 8:17 pm

Stitch wrote:
Vladex wrote:
The only thing more scary and stupid than keeping the A380 going would be shutting it down. Considering that:
1. Anyone buying the biggest airplane would then go to Boeing as the pax growth is double digits each year much like they flock to A321 in the narrowbody segment.


The 777-9 may be bigger, but I see the A350-1000 being an immensely popular model over the next two decades.



Immensely is a code word for not good enough or rather not big enough.


Stitch wrote:
Vladex wrote:
2. Would be the only airplane not to get right sized or stretched properly


At this point, it is likely too late for that. If airlines can't make the economics work on the current frame due to its size, an even larger one is likely not going to help.


Tell that to A321 for example and even 777x which is probably to your liking.

Stitch wrote:
Vladex wrote:
3. Rolls Royce engines developments would be worthless and pointless


Everything RR learned from the Trent 900 went into the Trent 1000 and Trent XWB and the lessons learned on those two powerplants have been rolled back into the Trent 900. So they've already recovered what they will from the 900 series.


Vladex wrote:
4. Would lose out on technological developments for other models


Advance and UltraFan are where RR's engine development resources are being spent and those can power an A330neo, an A350 and/or a 787 just as easily as they could an A380.


Vladex wrote:
5. Would forever be second guessing themselves like some fanboys do on 757


And it would be just as pointless a subject to do so.


Vladex wrote:
Changing guard can not change basic realities and it can't force long term thinking for short term interests. Unfortunately , economic interests are very short term nowadays.which is why this is even a discussion . I will watch to see as to what happens.


If demand dries up for the A380, then Airbus has no reason to keep offering it for sale. And beyond Airbus, all the A380 suppliers will not want to spend money keeping production facilities in mothballs in the hope that maybe someday someone will want to order more.

I would not be surprised if Airbus has made a private "last call" amongst it's A380 customers and received a universal response of "we're good, thanks". Air France, Lufthansa and Qantas have all cancelled their unfilled orders. British Airways is not, IMO, serious about adding to their fleet (at least with new builds) and none of the Asian operators have shown any interest on adding new frames with the exception of Singapore, and I don't believe they will be looking to replace any more now that they have replaced the five earliest "custom-build" frames. Virgin Atlantic has cancelled their order and Airbus will eventually be forced under IFRS 15 to cancel the frames on order from Amedeo and Air Accord as those frames have zero chance of ever being built.


Boeing is offering and apparently still selling 747 and 767 which are absurdly outdated and I don't see you complaining about that , so yeah thanks but no thanks for lecturing.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 8:27 pm

Vladex wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Vladex wrote:
The only thing more scary and stupid than keeping the A380 going would be shutting it down. Considering that:
1. Anyone buying the biggest airplane would then go to Boeing as the pax growth is double digits each year much like they flock to A321 in the narrowbody segment.


The 777-9 may be bigger, but I see the A350-1000 being an immensely popular model over the next two decades.



Immensely is a code word for not good enough or rather not big enough.

Here I was thinking it meant “very”.


Vladex wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Vladex wrote:
2. Would be the only airplane not to get right sized or stretched properly


At this point, it is likely too late for that. If airlines can't make the economics work on the current frame due to its size, an even larger one is likely not going to help.


Tell that to A321 for example and even 777x which is probably to your liking.

The difference is no one is downsizing from the A320 and the 777-200/-300 because they can’t fill them.

Vladex wrote:
Boeing is offering and apparently still selling 747 and 767 which are absurdly outdated and I don't see you complaining about that , so yeah thanks but no thanks for lecturing.

If demand dried up for those frames I imagine Stitch would be just as sanguine about the need to cancel them. The 767 is sticking around for the time being because of the tanker contract. The 747? Well if there is not a continuing flow of freighter contracts, then the writing is very much on the wall for that too.

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27247
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 8:33 pm

Stitch wrote:
The 777-9 may be bigger, but I see the A350-1000 being an immensely popular model over the next two decades.

Vladex wrote:
Immensely is a code word for not good enough or rather not big enough.


The A350-1000 is around the same size as the 777-300ER and Boeing shifted almost 850 of them. And then add the ~20% greater efficiency of the A350-1000 compared to the 777-300ER and to believe that it will be a failure in the market strikes me as ridiculous.

Stitch wrote:
If airlines can't make the economics work on the current frame due to its size, an even larger one is likely not going to help.

Vladex wrote:
Tell that to A321 for example and even 777x which is probably to your liking.


The A321 is dominating its market niche because its economics work fantastically well for its size. If it was 10m longer than it is with no other changes (i.e. 757-300), I expect it would be doing much worse.

And the 777-9, IMO, should have been stretched to the maximum 80m as I feel it needs more seats to effectively compete on per-seat economics with the A350-1000.


Vladex wrote:
Boeing is offering and apparently still selling 747 and 767 which are absurdly outdated and I don't see you complaining about that , so yeah thanks but no thanks for lecturing.


The 747 and 767 are (now) only available as freighters so they're not really relevant to a discussion about passenger frames. That being said, the (projected) 767 backlog is in the hundreds of frames thanks to FedEx and the USAF so there is plenty of demand to keep the line open. As for the 747, if not for the two large UPS orders that have sustained the program to date, it would have been closed down by now.
Last edited by Stitch on Sat Feb 09, 2019 8:40 pm, edited 6 times in total.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 837
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 8:35 pm

Vladex wrote:

Boeing is offering and apparently still selling 747 and 767 which are absurdly outdated and I don't see you complaining about that , so yeah thanks but no thanks for lecturing.

That is because Boeing has found a niche for them in the cargo market that sustains a low but feasible production rate. The A380 on the other hand, has no niche outside of the airlines that operate it, save for being a large charter aircraft (of which there is only 1 second hand plane).

Boeing has been lucky with the cargo market, and Airbus not so, with the rise of e-commerce. And I would hazard a guess that even Boeing didn't foresee this, just really a case of being in the right place at the right time.
 
User avatar
N14AZ
Posts: 4154
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 8:45 pm

SEPilot wrote:
Come on, you really think that all of Airbus’s rose-colored views of the market were not motivated by a desire to build the biggest plane out there?

On 19 December 2000, the supervisory board of newly restructured Airbus voted to launch an €8.8-billion programme to build the A3XX, re-designated as the A380, with 50 firm orders from six launch customers.

Before making this decision, the board members asked the A3XX-programme-manager „Soooo, what was again the reason why we should invest roughly 9 million Euro into this programme?“
And the programme manager replied: „because my engineers have the desire to build the biggest plane out there and you should feel the same“
And so the board made that important decision.

They then asked EU for loans and the people who check these kind of loans asked „Soooo, what was again the reason why we should give you these loans from taxpayers money?“ and they replied „because we want to build the biggest plane out there“. EU representatives felt ashamed that hadn’t seen this obvious justification and so they signed the loans....

Seriously, I cannot convince you and you cannot me so let’s agree to disagree. Always happy landings and have a nice weekend.

Best regards
N14AZ
 
acjbbj
Posts: 310
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:06 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 9:25 pm

Not surprising at all.
Douglas Aircraft Company
Born: 22 July 1921 (Santa Monica, CA)
Died: 23 May 2006 (Long Beach, CA), age 84 years 10 months 1 day
You will be missed.
 
Vladex
Posts: 475
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:44 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 10:51 pm

VirginFlyer wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Stitch wrote:

The 777-9 may be bigger, but I see the A350-1000 being an immensely popular model over the next two decades.



Immensely is a code word for not good enough or rather not big enough.

VirginFlyer wrote:
Here I was thinking it meant “very”.


"Immense" is one of many euphemisms used when someone has no idea what they are talking about or are trying to subvert the issue at hand.

Vladex wrote:
Stitch wrote:

At this point, it is likely too late for that. If airlines can't make the economics work on the current frame due to its size, an even larger one is likely not going to help.


Tell that to A321 for example and even 777x which is probably to your liking.

VirginFlyer wrote:
The difference is no one is downsizing from the A320 and the 777-200/-300 because they can’t fill them.


They are not downsizing because they can't as they go bust and bankrupt.

VirginFlyer wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Boeing is offering and apparently still selling 747 and 767 which are absurdly outdated and I don't see you complaining about that , so yeah thanks but no thanks for lecturing.

If demand dried up for those frames I imagine Stitch would be just as sanguine about the need to cancel them. The 767 is sticking around for the time being because of the tanker contract. The 747? Well if there is not a continuing flow of freighter contracts, then the writing is very much on the wall for that too.


V/F


I guess you have your own version of the meaning "dried up" . On the other hand, I am all in favor of B strictly becoming an all cargo producer. What I want to see are threads urging B to cut up these programs at least which makes me think another points
6. There is no way that A will cut A380 before 747.
7. EK and SQ will immediately stop being relevant airlines or in any way remarkable.

So if you want to see A380 dead, you have to wait until B cans 747 and when EK and SQ start really downsizing.
 
Vladex
Posts: 475
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:44 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 10:53 pm

Vladex wrote:
VirginFlyer wrote:


"Immense" is one of many euphemisms used when someone has no idea what they are talking about or are trying to subvert the issue at hand.




They are not downsizing because they can't as they go bust and bankrupt.



I guess you have your own version of the meaning "dried up" . On the other hand, I am all in favor of B strictly becoming an all cargo producer. What I want to see are threads urging B to cut up these programs at least which makes me think another points
6. There is no way that A will cut A380 before 747.
7. EK and SQ will immediately stop being relevant airlines or in any way remarkable.

So if you want to see A380 dead, you have to wait until B cans 747 and when EK and SQ start really downsizing.
[/quote]
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:10 pm

1989worstyear wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
Why would demand come back for the A380 in the 2030's? Even if there were demand for a plane larger than a 777-10X, why would any airline want a warmed over 30 tear old design. By now everyone knows a VLA must offer much better CASM than a smaller aircraft in order to compensate for lack of flexibility. There are going to be more efficient engines. A new 11 abreast twin engined plane with CFRP fuselage and wings could dethrone the 777X at the top of the market.


The A320 blows the "warmed-over 30 year old design" theory out of the water.


Not all 30 year old designs are the same. The A380 had serious design flaws from the beginning. It had extra wing structure built in to facilitate stretch and freighter models. It was efficient enough to compete against the 747, but won't be enough to compete against the 777X in efficiency. It also has wings with too low an aspect ratio to be as efficient as the 777X wing. More efficient engines aren't the only thing the A380 needs to be competitive.

The A320 was a better 727 replacement than the 757 for most of the missions the A320 could fly. It could fly almost transcontinental range across the US with a plane just a little smaller than a 727-200 but with lower CASM and trip cost than the 757-200. The A321-could carry almost as many passengers as the 757 with lower range but much lower CASM. The A321-NEO can fly coast to coast in the US but with almost as many passengers as the 757 but with lower CASM.
 
musman9853
Posts: 961
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:13 pm

VirginFlyer wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Stitch wrote:

The 777-9 may be bigger, but I see the A350-1000 being an immensely popular model over the next two decades.



Immensely is a code word for not good enough or rather not big enough.

Here I was thinking it meant “very”.


Vladex wrote:
Stitch wrote:

At this point, it is likely too late for that. If airlines can't make the economics work on the current frame due to its size, an even larger one is likely not going to help.


Tell that to A321 for example and even 777x which is probably to your liking.

The difference is no one is downsizing from the A320 and the 777-200/-300 because they can’t fill them.

Vladex wrote:
Boeing is offering and apparently still selling 747 and 767 which are absurdly outdated and I don't see you complaining about that , so yeah thanks but no thanks for lecturing.

If demand dried up for those frames I imagine Stitch would be just as sanguine about the need to cancel them. The 767 is sticking around for the time being because of the tanker contract. The 747? Well if there is not a continuing flow of freighter contracts, then the writing is very much on the wall for that too.

V/F



there's been tons of 767 freighter orders these last few years as well, enough that boeing considered a rate increase
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
Vladex
Posts: 475
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:44 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:17 pm

Stitch wrote:
The A350-1000 is around the same size as the 777-300ER and Boeing shifted almost 850 of them. And then add the ~20% greater efficiency of the A350-1000 compared to the 777-300ER and to believe that it will be a failure in the market strikes me as ridiculous.



10 years ago , A319 was outselling A321 wildly and today it's the opposite to the point of A319 end . I would think that any decent airline is looking at size first and foremost when choosing aircraft and yesterday's size is not related to today size . So when go up , they will likely choose the biggest aircraft.

Stitch wrote:
If airlines can't make the economics work on the current frame due to its size, an even larger one is likely not going to help.

Vladex wrote:
Tell that to A321 for example and even 777x which is probably to your liking.


Stitch wrote:
The A321 is dominating its market niche because its economics work fantastically well for its size. If it was 10m longer than it is with no other changes (i.e. 757-300), I expect it would be doing much worse.


That's a nice "niche" aircraft as you say, only the most efficient aircraft out there with the highest range which theoretically every airline should operate?

Stitch wrote:
And the 777-9, IMO, should have been stretched to the maximum 80m as I feel it needs more seats to effectively compete on per-seat economics with the A350-1000.


So you are not afraid of airlines "filling up" seats now with 777X but are afraid for A380?





Vladex wrote:
Boeing is offering and apparently still selling 747 and 767 which are absurdly outdated and I don't see you complaining about that , so yeah thanks but no thanks for lecturing.


Stitch wrote:
The 747 and 767 are (now) only available as freighters so they're not really relevant to a discussion about passenger frames. That being said, the (projected) 767 backlog is in the hundreds of frames thanks to FedEx and the USAF so there is plenty of demand to keep the line open. As for the 747, if not for the two large UPS orders that have sustained the program to date, it would have been closed down by now.
[/quote][/quote]

And there is no way A380 will shut down before those and they are available as passengers frames but no one needs them.
 
Swadian
Posts: 562
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:28 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
Why would demand come back for the A380 in the 2030's? Even if there were demand for a plane larger than a 777-10X, why would any airline want a warmed over 30 tear old design. By now everyone knows a VLA must offer much better CASM than a smaller aircraft in order to compensate for lack of flexibility. There are going to be more efficient engines. A new 11 abreast twin engined plane with CFRP fuselage and wings could dethrone the 777X at the top of the market.


The A320 blows the "warmed-over 30 year old design" theory out of the water.


Not all 30 year old designs are the same. The A380 had serious design flaws from the beginning. It had extra wing structure built in to facilitate stretch and freighter models. It was efficient enough to compete against the 747, but won't be enough to compete against the 777X in efficiency. It also has wings with too low an aspect ratio to be as efficient as the 777X wing. More efficient engines aren't the only thing the A380 needs to be competitive.

The A320 was a better 727 replacement than the 757 for most of the missions the A320 could fly. It could fly almost transcontinental range across the US with a plane just a little smaller than a 727-200 but with lower CASM and trip cost than the 757-200. The A321-could carry almost as many passengers as the 757 with lower range but much lower CASM. The A321-NEO can fly coast to coast in the US but with almost as many passengers as the 757 but with lower CASM.


Also there was the 737 which ended up being a good 727 replacement. The 737-800 could do everything a 727-200 could for much less cost, and by 1998 the 737 itself was a "warmed-over 30-year-old design". By now the 38M is a "warmed-over 50-year-old design". Too bad for the 757 which came later than 737 and is out of production.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27247
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:37 pm

Vladex wrote:
10 years ago , A319 was outselling A321 wildly and today it's the opposite to the point of A319 end . I would think that any decent airline is looking at size first and foremost when choosing aircraft and yesterday's size is not related to today size . So when go up , they will likely choose the biggest aircraft.


At EIS, the A321-100 had an MTOW of only 83,000kg so it lacked range due to not being able to tank much fuel and therefore was not very popular (with a total of 90 built). When Airbus released the -200 and raised the MTOW by 10,000kg this allowed the A321 to tank more fuel at the same payload which increased its range. And with ACTs, you could load even more fuel into it if you needed to. And sales skyrocketed thanks to the extra versatility and utility to the point that I believe the A321 is now the most popular model of the family.


Vladex wrote:
That's a nice "niche" aircraft as you say, only the most efficient aircraft out there with the highest range which theoretically every airline should operate?


If it was only about range and efficiency, the 777-200LR would have sold a fair bit more than 59 frames. But it isn't, so...



Vladex wrote:
So you are not afraid of airlines "filling up" seats now with 777X but are afraid for A380?


Most 777-9s will likely have only a handful of more seats than the 777-300ERs they will be replacing due to the less than 3m of extra cabin length (so that is around one row of Business Class or two rows of Economy Class). This means their 777-9s will be seating 150-250 less than their A380s.


Vladex wrote:
And there is no way A380 will shut down before (the 747 and 767) and they are available as passengers frames but no one needs them.


Boeing still offers the 767-300ER and 747-8 on their price list, but if you actually tried to order them, Boeing would politely decline and point you to the 787-8 and 777-300ER, respectively.

Boeing looked into restarting 767-300ER production in 2017 as a bridge to hold airlines like UA over until NMA would enter service, but even with a projected run in the dozens or even scores of planes, it would cost too much to restart the supply chain so the plan was abandoned. This is the same with the 747-8, where the suppliers of the custom components not shared with the freighter have all closed up shop so it is no longer possible to build the passenger model at scale (dozens or scores of frames).
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8435
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:50 pm

Vladex wrote:

10 years ago , A319 was outselling A321 wildly and today it's the opposite to the point of A319 end . I would think that any decent airline is looking at size first and foremost when choosing aircraft and yesterday's size is not related to today size . So when go up , they will likely choose the biggest aircraft.


It's not size that airlines are looking for, it is CASM. In 2009 the A380 had the lowest CASM of any aircraft in production and was therefore a somewhat attractive product, especially to Emirates who move a massive volume of passengers at costs per seat mile lower than Ryanair. In 2019 that simply isn't the case anymore, and the 787 and A350 (and 77X if it achieves Boeing's weight reduction targets) have lower CASM.

CASM though is only so valuable. As the A380 had shown, it is possible for a plane to be too big that yields are depressed in order to carry that many passengers. The 787 has also shown that an efficient small widebody dilutes the market for very large aircraft. 10 years ago there were no routes like NRT-SAN, NRT-SJC, or NRT-DEN, let alone LHR-PER. The passengers on those direct flights previously went through SFO or LAX, or SIN or DXB. Arguably this happened 20-30 years ago on TATL where the 767 (and A330) opened up routes to smaller European or US airports. The likes of PDX-LHR were not viable in an era when 742s or even DC10s where the standard TATL aircraft. Now the 787 is allowing routes like AUS-LHR and BNA-LHR to be opened up further drawing traffic from DFW, ATL etc. This isn't to say that large hubs are dying, they're not. With the possible exception of LHR-PER (PER isn't really a 'hub' but does have plenty of domestic Australia feed) all of those routes I mentioned are feeding into a large hub. What is happening is that traffic is being dispersed more thinly over multiple routes or frequencies. The Airbus marketing refered to the A380 as a 'hub-hub' aircraft but in an era when the 787 has opened up the likes of LHR-AUS and NRT-SAN the market never materialised for large aircraft flying LHR-DFW and TYO-SFO carrying large numbers of double-connect passengers.

The narrowbody market is very different, and the comparison isn't really apt. The A321 has a few things going for it, but the main one is that it is incredibly efficient at hauling ~200 passengers over short-medium distances. As I said, the A380s initial CASM advantage has already been made redundant, but that isn't the case for the A321. Whether orders hold up when the NMA enters the market only time will tell, but I'm inclined to believe that the A321NEO only has a 10-15 year production window as it will be uncompetitive by 2030. As for the A319, the operating costs are not competitive with other aircraft in production. The A220 is going to take what market exists for sales of an A319 sized aircraft.

As it is I don't think that the A319 was outselling the A321 in 2009 but I'm too lazy to look that up so you might be right.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:14 am

Vladex wrote:
VirginFlyer wrote:
Vladex wrote:


Immensely is a code word for not good enough or rather not big enough.

VirginFlyer wrote:
Here I was thinking it meant “very”.


"Immense" is one of many euphemisms used when someone has no idea what they are talking about or are trying to subvert the issue at hand.

Vladex wrote:

Tell that to A321 for example and even 777x which is probably to your liking.

VirginFlyer wrote:
The difference is no one is downsizing from the A320 and the 777-200/-300 because they can’t fill them.


They are not downsizing because they can't as they go bust and bankrupt.

VirginFlyer wrote:
If demand dried up for those frames I imagine Stitch would be just as sanguine about the need to cancel them. The 767 is sticking around for the time being because of the tanker contract. The 747? Well if there is not a continuing flow of freighter contracts, then the writing is very much on the wall for that too.


V/F


I guess you have your own version of the meaning "dried up" . On the other hand, I am all in favor of B strictly becoming an all cargo producer. What I want to see are threads urging B to cut up these programs at least which makes me think another points
6. There is no way that A will cut A380 before 747.
7. EK and SQ will immediately stop being relevant airlines or in any way remarkable.

So if you want to see A380 dead, you have to wait until B cans 747 and when EK and SQ start really downsizing.


Wow, I don't think I've ever seen someone in such denial.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:50 am

Swadian wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:

The A320 blows the "warmed-over 30 year old design" theory out of the water.


Not all 30 year old designs are the same. The A380 had serious design flaws from the beginning. It had extra wing structure built in to facilitate stretch and freighter models. It was efficient enough to compete against the 747, but won't be enough to compete against the 777X in efficiency. It also has wings with too low an aspect ratio to be as efficient as the 777X wing. More efficient engines aren't the only thing the A380 needs to be competitive.

The A320 was a better 727 replacement than the 757 for most of the missions the A320 could fly. It could fly almost transcontinental range across the US with a plane just a little smaller than a 727-200 but with lower CASM and trip cost than the 757-200. The A321-could carry almost as many passengers as the 757 with lower range but much lower CASM. The A321-NEO can fly coast to coast in the US but with almost as many passengers as the 757 but with lower CASM.


Also there was the 737 which ended up being a good 727 replacement. The 737-800 could do everything a 727-200 could for much less cost, and by 1998 the 737 itself was a "warmed-over 30-year-old design". By now the 38M is a "warmed-over 50-year-old design". Too bad for the 757 which came later than 737 and is out of production.


But with each generation the sweet spot for efficiency for the 737 increased. Both the 100 and 200 were aimed at the what is now the A220's capacity. The 100 got very few orders. By the 70's only the 200 was selling. If WN hadn't picked the 737 as its plane, perhaps Boeing might have shut down production and sold off the line. The reengining with the CFM-56 greatly improved range and CASM. The first CFM engined 737, the 737-300 was a stretch of the 200. The 400 was stretched more than the 300, and the 500 was almost the same as the 200. The 300 was by far the most popular version of the classic CFM engined generation. The NG was rewinged and reengined with even better CFM engines. The 700 was the launch version but the 800, which was slightly stretched compared to the 400, was the most popular. The 600 was the same length as the 500 but was too heavy and was killed off after poor sales due to high CASM. The 900 was a niche product that was a stretch of the 800 but needs long runways due to the short landing gear. The 737Max launch version was the -8Max. So far only the the -7Max prototype has been built, and interest has dropped even though the -7 has been stretched almost to the -400 length. The -9 has some sales, but the -10 has gotten more interest since it was launched.

Airbus' A320 series has also seen a size increase in its sales with the newer updated versions. There is hardly any interest in the A319. The A321 is getting most of the sales.

If the A380 follows the same pattern, it will be difficult to improve the CASM of the A380 enough while keeping it the same size. But then if Airbus were to stretch the A380 to improve CASM, it would make the A380 even more of a capacity risk. An 11-abreast new CFRP fuselage plane could kill the 777X but also kill off the A380-800. A stretched A380 NEO risks being way too large to sell enough frames to amortized the development costs plus a profit. The original idea was to replace two 747-400 flights to the same destination scheduled within an hour of each other. That's a lot of seats to have to sell every day.
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1528
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:35 am

Vladex wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Not only that, They said that they will stretch it .
https://leehamnews.com/2014/12/11/airbu ... o-stretch/
We will one day launch an A380neo and one day launch a stretched A380

It's been four years since that statement was made. Bregier no longer works for Airbus. There's no evidence of any such plan taking shape. In fact, we see the opposite. QF has just joined stalwarts such as AF and LH on the list of airlines that have dropped A380 orders. Airbus itself announced that it is discussing A380 contracts with EK. Press reports suggest Enders is trying to wind down the program before he leaves in April. At this point in time, the idea of an A380neo emerging seems fantastical.


The only thing more scary and stupid than keeping the A380 going would be shutting it down. Considering that
1. Anyone buying the biggest airplane would then go to Boeing as the pax growth is double digits each year much like they flock to A321 in the narrowbody segment.
2. Would be the only airplane not to get right sized or stretched properly
3. Rolls Royce engines developments would be worthless and pointless
4. Would lose out on technological developments for other models
5. Would forever be second guessing themselves like some fanboys do on 757

Changing guard can not change basic realities and it can't force long term thinking for short term interests. Unfortunately , economic interests are very short term nowadays.which is why this is even a discussion . I will watch to see as to what happens.


What do you see as the long term prospects for the 380?

What is your time frame?

What are acceptable losses in the meantime?

Would anyone be surprised if they are losing 30-50 million on each frame shipped....in real cas?

They are shipping over 60 320’s and almost 10 350’s a month and barely generating positive cash flow.

Either the losses on the 380 are not as digestible as claimed or costs need to be taken out of the 320 and 350. Either way they don’t have the luxury to ship $ w each frame.
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 2:00 am

I'm surprised the Air Accord orders weren't removed at the same time.
 
workhorse
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:07 am

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
GLARE has always been fighting internal political battles due to not-invented-here syndrome for certain key people. ...


Why "not invented here"? I know it's Dutch but wasn't Airbus the first to use it on an airplane?
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1858
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:38 am

workhorse wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:
GLARE has always been fighting internal political battles due to not-invented-here syndrome for certain key people. ...


Why "not invented here"? I know it's Dutch but wasn't Airbus the first to use it on an airplane?


Take a look at which A380 sections use GLARE and where they were designed / constructed. Notice that there's another section which uses no GLARE at all (even though it would have been the best place to apply it). That should give you your answer...
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
WIederling
Posts: 9348
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:39 am

musman9853 wrote:
there's been tons of 767 freighter orders these last few years as well, enough that Boeing considered a rate increase

Taken up on "competitive" pricing only available through the tanker deal supporting/subsidizing the production infrastructure.
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 9348
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 9:43 am

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Take a look at which A380 sections use GLARE and where they were designed / constructed. Notice that there's another section which uses no GLARE at all (even though it would have been the best place to apply it). That should give you your answer...


could you explain, please?

I see GLARE as suitable material for flat or 1dimensionaly curved fuselage parts that have to take hoop stress.
Murphy is an optimist
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 401
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:01 am

jeffrey0032j wrote:
That is because Boeing has found a niche for them in the cargo market that sustains a low but feasible production rate. The A380 on the other hand, has no niche outside of the airlines that operate it, save for being a large charter aircraft (of which there is only 1 second hand plane).


Perhaps the real flaw of the A380 is the fact that it cannot be used as a cargo plane in the way that the 747 can. Did Airbus make a mistake by placing the cockpit centrally, rather than on the upper deck?
 
workhorse
Posts: 816
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:11 am

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Take a look at which A380 sections use GLARE and where they were designed / constructed. Notice that there's another section which uses no GLARE at all (even though it would have been the best place to apply it). That should give you your answer...


You mean the nose section?
 
WIederling
Posts: 9348
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:19 am

SurlyBonds wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
That is because Boeing has found a niche for them in the cargo market that sustains a low but feasible production rate. The A380 on the other hand, has no niche outside of the airlines that operate it, save for being a large charter aircraft (of which there is only 1 second hand plane).


Perhaps the real flaw of the A380 is the fact that it cannot be used as a cargo plane in the way that the 747 can. Did Airbus make a mistake by placing the cockpit centrally, rather than on the upper deck?


Certification wise you can no longer have passenger seating with egress on one end only. ( like the lower deck bow section on the 747.) cockpit on the upper level would create just so much dead space on the lower deck.
aerodynamics and "pilot viewpoint" has the cockpit in just the right place.
( compare to the A350 which in its outline has high similarity to a scaled A380 front.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1498
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:35 am

WIederling wrote:
musman9853 wrote:
there's been tons of 767 freighter orders these last few years as well, enough that Boeing considered a rate increase

Taken up on "competitive" pricing only available through the tanker deal supporting/subsidizing the production infrastructure.

So what?
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1545
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:52 pm

Bricktop wrote:
WIederling wrote:
musman9853 wrote:
there's been tons of 767 freighter orders these last few years as well, enough that Boeing considered a rate increase

Taken up on "competitive" pricing only available through the tanker deal supporting/subsidizing the production infrastructure.

So what?


I think he is saying that it amounts to a government subsidy for commercial 767F sales - a similar end point to that of the direct government loans for A380 development
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 837
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:56 pm

SurlyBonds wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
That is because Boeing has found a niche for them in the cargo market that sustains a low but feasible production rate. The A380 on the other hand, has no niche outside of the airlines that operate it, save for being a large charter aircraft (of which there is only 1 second hand plane).


Perhaps the real flaw of the A380 is the fact that it cannot be used as a cargo plane in the way that the 747 can. Did Airbus make a mistake by placing the cockpit centrally, rather than on the upper deck?

The real problem is the upper deck floor structure, which is an integral part of the structure. This means that it cannot be removed, and thus the A380 will be restricted to carrying conventional cargo containers on the lower deck only (ie no outsized cargo), and this is after the lower deck floor structure has been reinforced (like in the 747 BCF/A330 P2F). And to carry any cargo on the upper deck, that upper deck floor structure will have to be reinforced, which adds further weight. And assuming you manage to get a double deck A380F, it is too big a size as a package freighter to make it work operationally and economically in current environments.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2257
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:26 pm

And soon there will be a 77W P2F that will be terrific package freighters, but also needing floor beam strengthening.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24641
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:54 pm

N14AZ wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Come on, you really think that all of Airbus’s rose-colored views of the market were not motivated by a desire to build the biggest plane out there?

On 19 December 2000, the supervisory board of newly restructured Airbus voted to launch an €8.8-billion programme to build the A3XX, re-designated as the A380, with 50 firm orders from six launch customers.

Before making this decision, the board members asked the A3XX-programme-manager „Soooo, what was again the reason why we should invest roughly 9 million Euro into this programme?“
And the programme manager replied: „because my engineers have the desire to build the biggest plane out there and you should feel the same“
And so the board made that important decision.

They then asked EU for loans and the people who check these kind of loans asked „Soooo, what was again the reason why we should give you these loans from taxpayers money?“ and they replied „because we want to build the biggest plane out there“. EU representatives felt ashamed that hadn’t seen this obvious justification and so they signed the loans....

Seriously, I cannot convince you and you cannot me so let’s agree to disagree. Always happy landings and have a nice weekend.

Best regards
N14AZ

The project started long before it got to the board level. The reasons it started was because people in Airbus's new products development group wanted to break the 747 monopoly by building a bigger aircraft, and because "we badly needed the design work". All this is according to the man who brought the project together, Jean Roeder ( ref: https://books.google.com/books?id=KcaYj ... =a380+book page 7 ).

It wasn't because marketing did a study and found the market wanted such an airplane. At best everyone involved in A380 knew air travel would grow and they leaped to the conclusion that the way to capture the growth was a VLA, without thinking much (enough?) about the other ways the growth could be handled. The engineers went big, they got the C Suite to buy in, and the drug like rush took over.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Veigar
Posts: 528
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 2:23 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
SurlyBonds wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
That is because Boeing has found a niche for them in the cargo market that sustains a low but feasible production rate. The A380 on the other hand, has no niche outside of the airlines that operate it, save for being a large charter aircraft (of which there is only 1 second hand plane).


Perhaps the real flaw of the A380 is the fact that it cannot be used as a cargo plane in the way that the 747 can. Did Airbus make a mistake by placing the cockpit centrally, rather than on the upper deck?

The real problem is the upper deck floor structure, which is an integral part of the structure. This means that it cannot be removed, and thus the A380 will be restricted to carrying conventional cargo containers on the lower deck only (ie no outsized cargo), and this is after the lower deck floor structure has been reinforced (like in the 747 BCF/A330 P2F). And to carry any cargo on the upper deck, that upper deck floor structure will have to be reinforced, which adds further weight. And assuming you manage to get a double deck A380F, it is too big a size as a package freighter to make it work operationally and economically in current environments.


I have also heard its ill-fated F missions won't ever take flight because the aircraft would have too low MTOW to take off assuming you remove the double deck and just fill the entire thing with over sized cargo akin to the Boeing Dreamlifter?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24641
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 2:45 pm

JerseyFlyer wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
WIederling wrote:
Taken up on "competitive" pricing only available through the tanker deal supporting/subsidizing the production infrastructure.

So what?

I think he is saying that it amounts to a government subsidy for commercial 767F sales - a similar end point to that of the direct government loans for A380 development

It's a false equivalence.

In the case of 767F Boeing is delivering products to the government, which is quite unlike getting government loans and not delivering any product to the government.

Boeing is in a deep financial hole on the tanker program since it cost a lot more to develop the product than it projected.

The commercial models aren't even the same model: the USAF is buying 767-2C, commercial market is buying 767-300F, and the commercial development predated the tanker.

If anything, it has been the commercial freighters that have been subsidizing the tankers, and probably will be for many years to come.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
lifecomm
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:29 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:03 pm

Stitch wrote:
Vladex wrote:
And there is no way A380 will shut down before (the 747 and 767) and they are available as passengers frames but no one needs them.


Boeing still offers the 767-300ER and 747-8 on their price list, but if you actually tried to order them, Boeing would politely decline and point you to the 787-8 and 777-300ER, respectively.

Boeing looked into restarting 767-300ER production in 2017 as a bridge to hold airlines like UA over until NMA would enter service, but even with a projected run in the dozens or even scores of planes, it would cost too much to restart the supply chain so the plan was abandoned. This is the same with the 747-8, where the suppliers of the custom components not shared with the freighter have all closed up shop so it is no longer possible to build the passenger model at scale (dozens or scores of frames).

Bing! This is precisely what happened to the venerable 757. I'm sure Boeing could have sold boatloads more - at a small profit or small loss. But, as any company, Boeing chose to offer improved 737s as the profitable alternative. I'm sure the 747-8i could have sold better - with more aggressive pricing, as well.

It seems that Airbus is making the same calculations with the 380. Maybe they feel that they can make more money offing the 350 family instead.

BTW: I flew this past weekend on a Delta, recently refurbished, 757 on their St. Louis - Atlanta route. What a great airplane!
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 5:58 pm

WIederling wrote:
SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Take a look at which A380 sections use GLARE and where they were designed / constructed. Notice that there's another section which uses no GLARE at all (even though it would have been the best place to apply it). That should give you your answer...


could you explain, please?

I see GLARE as suitable material for flat or 1dimensionaly curved fuselage parts that have to take hoop stress.


I think he may be getting at the upper lobe of the centre fuselage:

Image
Source: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Typ ... _329585809

Image
Source: https://slideplayer.com/slide/8067715/

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
Noshow
Posts: 1705
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: QF officially cancels final 8 A380s.

Sun Feb 10, 2019 6:00 pm

The glare share has been reduced to next to nothing. It's today just one part of the upper back body IIRC.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos