Airbus will be a better company without it.
The stock market has spoken as well. A jump of around 10 % since the announcement.
Absolutely true, proving again that the program has never been viable and was a liability.
So you think that the stock market are the rationals? Most of the stock market is just reacting to news for short-term trades.
The Airbus stock is not even worth 40 EUR if you go by fundamentals.
GEUltraFan9XGTF, fanboyism is written in your alias, not in mine.
Credit should be given where due and the same for criticism.
EK's 2-class configuration, the 77W has an OEW of 0.393 tons per passenger, while the A380 clocks in at 0.447 tons per passenger. In QR's case, the 787-8 is at 0.447 tons per passenger while the A380 is at 0.531 tons per passenger. In other words, the A380 could and should be designed at least 10 % more efficient structurally than it is.
In hindsight, they also should've used more CFRP (which made huge advances in cost) and not used GLARE (which turned out to be very expensive).
No, in other words your indicators are irrelevant.
I think that it makes more sense to compare floor space versus OEW.
B777W OEW / Floor area 170tons / 340m² 0,5 tons / m²
A380 OEW / Floor area 280 tons / 580m² 0,48 tons / m²
That A380 operators decide to operate low density configurations on the A380 versus high density configurations on the B77W is their decision, but in no way should it be interpreted as inefficiencies of the design.
Where the B77W and subsequently the B777X will win consistently is freight capacity.
So if you include that, one could say that the B77W has higher payload capabilities per unit of empty weight.
Another relevant indicator is fuel burn per unit of floor space.
Here again, the A380 wins with 21kg/hour per m² versus 22kg/hour per m² of the B77W.
The B77W wins when freight is included.
However, overall quite irrelevant parameters considering the cheap fuel.
Where the A380 can't be beaten today, is the amount of real estate that you get for your monthly lease.
The A350, B77X, B787 promise unbeaten fuel burn per unit of payload, but are uber expensive to purchase/lease. The same could be said of the A321neo.
Basically what airline executives are doing today is paying double digit more money to Airbus and Boeing for models that offer double digit fuel burn reductions.
At a time of cheap fuel, and considering the consequences of the 'bleeding edge of engine technology', the ROI is very questionable.
OPEC are crying their hearts off while Airbus and Boeing are racking up record profits.
Source IATA / Platts
We can pretend that it's the A380's fault as an overbuilt design based on non-technical rumors, but the real thing that is happening is that clueless executives are chairing airlines' boards and are doing the monkey-see, monkey-do thing. Nobody buys A380's, so everybody else isn't buying.
All said executives are good at doing is pretending to be god's gifts to aviation and pretending to run the show.
MOL was a god for a while but in his new strategy he is setting up FR for its downfall. AAB came to Italy promising Air Italy 20 B787's but already cutting routes before starting them, as I predicted.
At the moment, only DL management earns a competent status in my eyes, they're the only ones knowing what they're doing and with co*ones to try something different.
Remember that the industry was prepared to let the Cseries die the same way Airbus is killing the A380 until DL stepped in and now suddenly the A220 is the holy grail that everybody and their mother wants in their fleet.