User avatar
Grizzly410
Posts: 243
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Mon Dec 02, 2019 11:24 am

We know now the A380 program didn’t have the market expected by Airbus, but whatever one thinks here such a big company don’t start a big project out of vanity or ego. At the time Airbus board was convinced they were taking the right decision based on data they believed in. Even the best poker player in the world makes bad call, usually because he misread the situation, it happens and doesn’t makes him a bad player. On the contrary, he can use to improve his game and take advantage of it in the future.

The financial aspect didn’t go well that’s for sure, the very bad execution have been very costly.
But the reasons of the bad execution weren’t consequence of the sheer size of the aircraft (a part, maybe), a huge bit is because it was first Airbus clean sheet for a long time. The legacy program tooling wasn’t up to date to design, develop and certify a new airliner. The workforce either, by the way. A380 program have had a huge impact on these aspects, since then there is an awful lot of software/processes used companywide today that were developed, tested and improved during A380 development.
A350XWB and subsequent development all benefited of having tooling, processes and workforce ready and adapted to meet their targets as well as they did.

If not for the whale, whatever form would have taken the first Airbus clean sheet would have had to bear the cost and suffer from the internal transformation needed to put a market a new airliner in the XXIth century… IMO, it would have been devastating for Airbus to fail on the A350XWB program or A320neo, while in the end, thanks to the wrong original assumptions, pulling the plug on A380 is not that damaging and doesn’t leave significant market segment uncovered by its product line up.

In the end, calling A380 a success is certainly an exaggeration but the benefits gained from the experience are certainly more valuable today and the future than the losses already written off.
In order to be old and wise, one must first be young and dumb.
 
CFRPwingALbody
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:37 pm

I agree that when you only look at the A380 program, it has been a compleate financial desaster. But if you Iook at what Airbus learned from it, it wasn't that bad.
I agree with Grizzly410; Airbus changed their aircraft design methadology because of the A380 experiance. This new methadology was used on the A350XWB, A320NEO and A330NEO {=A350 mk1}.
I think the Airbus of today is totally different than EADS (Airbus holding) that developed the A380. EADS was a holding of several national companies. There where walls between the different companies under EADS. I think these walls were a couse of the wiring problem on the A380 (Caria v4 & v5). Afaik EADS has been completely restructured into the Airbus of today.
The lesson that EADS had to be restructured is in my oppinion the largest benefit of the A380 program.

Besides this, I think there is a second restructuring caused by the A380 program. That is in how aerospace is stimulated in Europa. You may view this as nasty destortion of the market, but Afaik everyone is doing it. European states funded the mayority part of the A380 development, in exchange they have employment and royalty return payments.
The mayority of the factories and employment have been transfered to the A350XWB.
This direct funding of an aircraft is most likely a practice of the past.
It tured out that Airbus hadn't a good view on the status of turbofan development, this resulted in Airbus getting lower efficiency engines for their A380 than Boeing got for the 787 and 747-8. Instead of direct funds for developing a new aircraft, European states fund Public Private Partnership R&D projects: EU Horizon Cleansky. Afaik before the A380 there was much less early risk reduction R&D done in Europe.
Boeing get's R&D project funds from NASA and the US DoD. Now the remaining market distortion are tax arrangements. But let's leave the discussion about states distortion of the 'open' commercial aviation market into their dedicated topics.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1248
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:47 pm

Qazar wrote:
I must admit that I'm a bit perplexed still by the lack of success of the A380 with airlines... I understand that the lack of sales lead Airbus to shut down the program - which is a proper business decision to be taken in such circumstances. What I'm baffled by is how IATA can state that air travel with double to 8.1B travellers and yet demand for the A380 is still not there in contrast to this figure! Especially in today's day and age when everyone talks about Climate Change, carbon offsetting, and operating with good environmental stewardship, how can airlines justify growth in the future through, as an example, multiple daily B787 flights between 2 cities rather than just launch the A380!


The airlines know that while demand is increasing over time, it also changes over time due to economic cycles and other factors. You can't fly half an A380 in times of low demand, but you can stop the second frequency if the economy tanks, or alternatively, add a second frequency with a long range twin in times of high demand. The smaller plane gives the airlines a better way to manage risk.

Also, even if you are a believer in man caused climate change (I am not), the A380 is not necessarily the best choice. It pollutes massively. Assumptions for low pollution per pax are based upon a full plane, which is not always the case. And the smaller twin always has less emissions.

The A380 was never driven by the market, ie., "real" airlines imho.
 
asr0dzjq
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:36 am

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:16 pm

SteelChair wrote:
Qazar wrote:
I must admit that I'm a bit perplexed still by the lack of success of the A380 with airlines... I understand that the lack of sales lead Airbus to shut down the program - which is a proper business decision to be taken in such circumstances. What I'm baffled by is how IATA can state that air travel with double to 8.1B travellers and yet demand for the A380 is still not there in contrast to this figure! Especially in today's day and age when everyone talks about Climate Change, carbon offsetting, and operating with good environmental stewardship, how can airlines justify growth in the future through, as an example, multiple daily B787 flights between 2 cities rather than just launch the A380!


The airlines know that while demand is increasing over time, it also changes over time due to economic cycles and other factors. You can't fly half an A380 in times of low demand, but you can stop the second frequency if the economy tanks, or alternatively, add a second frequency with a long range twin in times of high demand. The smaller plane gives the airlines a better way to manage risk.

Also, even if you are a believer in man caused climate change (I am not), the A380 is not necessarily the best choice. It pollutes massively. Assumptions for low pollution per pax are based upon a full plane, which is not always the case. And the smaller twin always has less emissions.

The A380 was never driven by the market, ie., "real" airlines imho.

It was doomed from the get-go. A shoddy "exercise" based in pride, hubris, and wishful thinking.
Last edited by asr0dzjq on Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
R.I.P.

Pan Am (B 19-10-1927, D 4-12-1991)
TWA (B 1-10-1930, D 1-12-2001)
Douglas (B 22-7-1921, D 23-5-2006)
 
User avatar
sergegva
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 9:12 pm

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:37 pm

asr0dzjq wrote:
It was doomed from the get-go. A shoddy "exercise" based in pride, hubris, and nationalism.

Nationalism? For an aircraft built by a multitude of countries?
Pride... at most, why not... But all this argumentation aimed at making it an absolute vanity project seems to me rather the work of a few unconditional fans of American manufacturers, frustrated to see the escape of some trophy.
Last edited by sergegva on Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
asr0dzjq
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:36 am

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:39 pm

sergegva wrote:
asr0dzjq wrote:
It was doomed from the get-go. A shoddy "exercise" based in pride, hubris, and nationalism.

Nationalism? For an aircraft built by a multitude of countries?

Yeah, fixed.
R.I.P.

Pan Am (B 19-10-1927, D 4-12-1991)
TWA (B 1-10-1930, D 1-12-2001)
Douglas (B 22-7-1921, D 23-5-2006)
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21935
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:48 pm

Sokes wrote:
"Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards."
Soren Kierkegaard

Airbus launched the A380 in December 2000. At that time Emirates carried around 5 million passengers/ year. In 2019 Emirates approached 59 million passengers. Without Emirates old airlines may have upgraded to A380s.

I think that is a factor Airbus did not count on. EK took a lot of inefficiency out of the system by flying so many A380s to one central hub and keeping them flying so many hours a day. Airbus thought many pax would fly (spoke) - (hub) - (hub) - (spoke) with the H2H flight being predominantly an A380. Instead we got (spoke) - (DXB) - (spoke) with many of those spokes being flown both 77W and A380. The H2H flights would have been mostly on the legacies to/from their fortress hubs and probably not flown as efficiently as EK flies, Airbus was expecting a much bigger and more diverse market for A380s. The diversity matters, Airbus kept saying they would not do an A380neo just for one airline, and without the NEO the product died.

I guess the writing was on the wall when LH didn't take up a few orders, and now AF is the second airline to retire an A380 and the first to announce plans to retire its entire fleet. I would think Airbus would have expected more support in its home market.

Airbus also told us the A380 would be a natural fit for China and other emerging/growing markets in Asia, and it seems despite many visits from EU politicians and Airbus executives they never were able to grow their market beyond the one CN order.
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
Revelation
Posts: 21935
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:02 pm

asr0dzjq wrote:
sergegva wrote:
asr0dzjq wrote:
It was doomed from the get-go. A shoddy "exercise" based in pride, hubris, and nationalism.

Nationalism? For an aircraft built by a multitude of countries?

Yeah, fixed.

IMO it was being made into a symbol of the success of the EU, for better or for worse.

Image

(Front, from L to R) British Prime Minister Tony Blair, French President Jacques Chirac, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero attend the inauguration of the new Airbus A380 in Toulouse, southern France, January 18, 2005. [Reuters]

Ref: Airbus throws glitzy party for A380 superjumbo
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
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1248
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:23 pm

asr0dzjq wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
Qazar wrote:
I must admit that I'm a bit perplexed still by the lack of success of the A380 with airlines... I understand that the lack of sales lead Airbus to shut down the program - which is a proper business decision to be taken in such circumstances. What I'm baffled by is how IATA can state that air travel with double to 8.1B travellers and yet demand for the A380 is still not there in contrast to this figure! Especially in today's day and age when everyone talks about Climate Change, carbon offsetting, and operating with good environmental stewardship, how can airlines justify growth in the future through, as an example, multiple daily B787 flights between 2 cities rather than just launch the A380!


The airlines know that while demand is increasing over time, it also changes over time due to economic cycles and other factors. You can't fly half an A380 in times of low demand, but you can stop the second frequency if the economy tanks, or alternatively, add a second frequency with a long range twin in times of high demand. The smaller plane gives the airlines a better way to manage risk.

Also, even if you are a believer in man caused climate change (I am not), the A380 is not necessarily the best choice. It pollutes massively. Assumptions for low pollution per pax are based upon a full plane, which is not always the case. And the smaller twin always has less emissions.

The A380 was never driven by the market, ie., "real" airlines imho.

It was doomed from the get-go. A shoddy "exercise" based in pride, hubris, and wishful thinking.


I was responding specifically to the comment about airlines not wanting it. They never demanded it in the first place, at least not the wise ones.
 
Jetport
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:23 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:26 pm

So according to Baldr's analysis, Boeing should have been insolvent for at least the last decade and Airbus should have been printing so much money they would be worth more than Apple or Microsoft by now. The fact that Boeing has been more profitable than Airbus over almost any multiyear period you want to measure since Airbus became a publicly traded company makes Baldr's financial analysis and posts look ridiculous.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21935
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:42 pm

Airbus CEO Faury is a bit more humble and circumspect than some of the posters here.

Asked about the industry problem of overpromising, Faury declined to comment on Boeing or engine manufacturers’ issues, both of which have been very much in the focus of criticism.

“If we look at ourselves in terms of disappointment, we have difficulties in the speed of ramp-ups of our A320 blockbuster, so we have to be humble,” Faury said.

“I don’t think we disappoint on the product side, rather on the contrary. But yes, we are under strong pressure to deliver the products we have committed to faster, and we had difficulties with it that we try to overcome.”

And points out that the MAX tragedy is also providing Airbus some "tension" with regard to the aviation authorities:

What concerns him more is the overall outcome of the MAX crisis for the aircraft industry, as long-standing procedures of certifying new aircraft might change and complicate procedures and ultimately making them even lengthier.

More negative is the tension the MAX grounding has created for us in procedures with authorities,” he added. “When it comes to safety, aviation has benefitted from a global framework, a level playing field in safety matters with a very close cooperation of the authorities, we think this is really an enabler of safety. We want this to keep going.”
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
 
VV
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:35 pm

What do you expect him to say?
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4054
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Mon Dec 02, 2019 9:27 pm

the success of Airbus was that the A380 Flew, The Failure was? It Flew! But by the time they had it ready to sell? The market moved to Point to Point and nobody needed super hubs anymore to get overseas to the east or to the west. And? Nobody needs to get there via Dubai Much to the chagrin of Emirates. They got suckered in by their OWN arrogance. but they might have the corner on some nice restaurants, As that may be all the A380 till be good for, They would make Dandy Theme Restaurants.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1248
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Mon Dec 02, 2019 11:00 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
the success of Airbus was that the A380 Flew, The Failure was? It Flew! But by the time they had it ready to sell? The market moved to Point to Point and nobody needed super hubs anymore to get overseas to the east or to the west. And? Nobody needs to get there via Dubai Much to the chagrin of Emirates. They got suckered in by their OWN arrogance. but they might have the corner on some nice restaurants, As that may be all the A380 till be good for, They would make Dandy Theme Restaurants.


The market didn't move. It was never there in the first place. Don't think that the world abandoned the A380 when it never accepted it before.
 
asr0dzjq
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:36 am

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:40 am

SteelChair wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
the success of Airbus was that the A380 Flew, The Failure was? It Flew! But by the time they had it ready to sell? The market moved to Point to Point and nobody needed super hubs anymore to get overseas to the east or to the west. And? Nobody needs to get there via Dubai Much to the chagrin of Emirates. They got suckered in by their OWN arrogance. but they might have the corner on some nice restaurants, As that may be all the A380 till be good for, They would make Dandy Theme Restaurants.


The market didn't move. It was never there in the first place. Don't think that the world abandoned the A380 when it never accepted it before.

Exactly! I myself, at least, easily consider the A380 to be the biggest failure in commercial aviation. Mainly due to the fact that when it came to the A380, Airbus were pretty much exactly wrong.
R.I.P.

Pan Am (B 19-10-1927, D 4-12-1991)
TWA (B 1-10-1930, D 1-12-2001)
Douglas (B 22-7-1921, D 23-5-2006)
 
Sokes
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:35 am

Revelation wrote:
...
Airbus thought many pax would fly (spoke) - (hub) - (hub) - (spoke) with the H2H flight being predominantly an A380. Instead we got (spoke) - (DXB) - (spoke) with many of those spokes being flown both 77W and A380.



Excellent analysis.
Point to point is domestic or short range, charter and budget airlines.
Medium/ long range were often three flights. Smaller planes like B787-8 allow for more hubs and two flight journeys, splitting passenger numbers.
Emirates, as so often, is the exception to the rule concerning plane size.



Revelation wrote:

IMO it was being made into a symbol of the success of the EU, for better or for worse.



That analysis is even better. And how nice. Normally people are united by having a common enemy:
12 tribes of Israel, Germany's wars of unity under Bismarck, India had it's wars with Pakistan ...
The movie "The king" has England united through war with France.
These are good times if people get united by creating something, not destroying something.

Image

source:
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/ ... index.html
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
cpd
Posts: 6042
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:48 am

Sokes wrote:
Excellent analysis.
Point to point is domestic or short range, charter and budget airlines.
Medium/ long range were often three flights. Smaller planes like B787-8 allow for more hubs and two flight journeys, splitting passenger numbers.
Emirates, as so often, is the exception to the rule concerning plane size.


Indeed, my flying is usually just two A380s, or the A380 and a B777. No other planes, no 787, no A350, not a 737, nor A320 or anything else.

But that's the nature of my flying, it's a big 13-14 hour flight then another 6 hour one. Reality is that no plane in the near future offers the promise to be able cut out the middle stop, or it just won't be viable for airlines to do those flights.

Unless some manufacturer comes up with a miracle aircraft. I can't see that happening soon.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21935
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:49 pm

cpd wrote:
Sokes wrote:
Excellent analysis.
Point to point is domestic or short range, charter and budget airlines.
Medium/ long range were often three flights. Smaller planes like B787-8 allow for more hubs and two flight journeys, splitting passenger numbers.
Emirates, as so often, is the exception to the rule concerning plane size.

Indeed, my flying is usually just two A380s, or the A380 and a B777. No other planes, no 787, no A350, not a 737, nor A320 or anything else.

But that's the nature of my flying, it's a big 13-14 hour flight then another 6 hour one. Reality is that no plane in the near future offers the promise to be able cut out the middle stop, or it just won't be viable for airlines to do those flights.

Unless some manufacturer comes up with a miracle aircraft. I can't see that happening soon.

The issue for EK is that all it takes is something like Project Sunrise or a point to point flight on a smaller plane to come along and skim off the premium passengers and flip many flights from profit to loss. I think the need to go further afield at a smaller airplane size is why EK took 789 instead of 78X like most people expected.

Sokes wrote:
That analysis is even better. And how nice. Normally people are united by having a common enemy:
12 tribes of Israel, Germany's wars of unity under Bismarck, India had it's wars with Pakistan ...
The movie "The king" has England united through war with France.
These are good times if people get united by creating something, not destroying something.

Quite a shame the thing they created ended up being economically unviable.
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
 
seb76
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 5:02 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:05 pm

asr0dzjq wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
the success of Airbus was that the A380 Flew, The Failure was? It Flew! But by the time they had it ready to sell? The market moved to Point to Point and nobody needed super hubs anymore to get overseas to the east or to the west. And? Nobody needs to get there via Dubai Much to the chagrin of Emirates. They got suckered in by their OWN arrogance. but they might have the corner on some nice restaurants, As that may be all the A380 till be good for, They would make Dandy Theme Restaurants.


The market didn't move. It was never there in the first place. Don't think that the world abandoned the A380 when it never accepted it before.

Exactly! I myself, at least, easily consider the A380 to be the biggest failure in commercial aviation. Mainly due to the fact that when it came to the A380, Airbus were pretty much exactly wrong.


Biggest failure in commercial aviation ... depends on how you select your metrics... If we think of quantities built or security ... there are much better winners for this title.

What shall we say about the Lockheed Tristar in terms of total units delivered vs program cost? (although I have a love for this plane) ? What about Concorde (love it too, but we can't say it was secure or made money)? And if we leave the area of completely new programs started from scratch and start comparing apple with oranges, we can even talk about derivatives or warmed over models, then the DC-11, 747-800, A340-600; A-318 and 737-600 didn't have stellar sales performances either.

So far the A380 hasn't killed anyone and passengers love it. It was never grounded either. The business case was arguable even at the time they started the project, but Airbus could demonstrate that they were serious about being a proper alternative to Boeing in the VLA market.
 
JonesNL
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:11 pm

Revelation wrote:
Quite a shame the thing they created ended up being economically unviable.


Ironically, it is usually also economically not the smartest move when one tries to unite for a common enemy either...
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9266
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:18 pm

[quote="seahawk" It had the A330 which did fine against the 767, the A340 was dead against the 777 and they had nothing to fight the 747 with. [/quote]
The purpose of the A340-600 in relation to Airbus products to Boeing products was what, a 747 or 777 competitor?
 
User avatar
Wildlander
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 4:08 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:28 pm

The A340-600 was foreseen as a 747 replacement at a time when Boeing had appeared to be unable to develop the 777-300 into a range-capable challenger. Boeing went on the develop the 300ER more than was deemed possible and the rest is history.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9266
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:42 pm

Wildlander wrote:
The A340-600 was foreseen as a 747 replacement at a time when Boeing had appeared to be unable to develop the 777-300 into a range-capable challenger. Boeing went on the develop the 300ER more than was deemed possible and the rest is history.

So in terms of Airbus products the 747 was covered, indeed the A340-600 could be viewed as being a competitor to the 747 and 777, it did match the 747 is some categories.
So when the A380 project came along, my opinion it was about expanding the product line, not about having a product to compete with the other OEM.
 
Baldr
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2019 1:10 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:10 pm

asr0dzjq wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
the success of Airbus was that the A380 Flew, The Failure was? It Flew! But by the time they had it ready to sell? The market moved to Point to Point and nobody needed super hubs anymore to get overseas to the east or to the west. And? Nobody needs to get there via Dubai Much to the chagrin of Emirates. They got suckered in by their OWN arrogance. but they might have the corner on some nice restaurants, As that may be all the A380 till be good for, They would make Dandy Theme Restaurants.


The market didn't move. It was never there in the first place. Don't think that the world abandoned the A380 when it never accepted it before.

Exactly! I myself, at least, easily consider the A380 to be the biggest failure in commercial aviation. Mainly due to the fact that when it came to the A380, Airbus were pretty much exactly wrong.


Biggest failure in commercial aviation?

That's an easy question to answer.

It's the 737 MAX.

Apart from the fact that the 737 MAX has majorly ruined Boeing's reputation, the total costs of the 737 MAX programme is now exceeding $14 billion -- i.e. $4 billion for R&D and $10 billion ++ for the grounding -- and the costs are mounting up in such a way that it is now on a path where it could soon exceed the total costs of development for the A380.
 
fightforlove
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:25 pm

par13del wrote:
Wildlander wrote:
The A340-600 was foreseen as a 747 replacement at a time when Boeing had appeared to be unable to develop the 777-300 into a range-capable challenger. Boeing went on the develop the 300ER more than was deemed possible and the rest is history.

So in terms of Airbus products the 747 was covered, indeed the A340-600 could be viewed as being a competitor to the 747 and 777, it did match the 747 is some categories.
So when the A380 project came along, my opinion it was about expanding the product line, not about having a product to compete with the other OEM.


As I understand it, Airbus approached the VLA market with what they called the "Pincher Strategy": The A340 pinching the 747 on the smaller end and the A380 on the higher end. Boeing were studying the 747-500/600 stretches at the time Airbus were conceptualizing the A380. Even after Boeing shelved the 745/746, Airbus continued with the A380, believing they needed a VLA to fully cover the higher end of the 747's capabilities. Airbus' CEO at the time commented: "they (Boeing) have a product, we don't".
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21935
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:45 pm

Baldr wrote:
asr0dzjq wrote:
Exactly! I myself, at least, easily consider the A380 to be the biggest failure in commercial aviation. Mainly due to the fact that when it came to the A380, Airbus were pretty much exactly wrong.

Biggest failure in commercial aviation?

That's an easy question to answer.

It's the 737 MAX.

Apart from the fact that the 737 MAX has majorly ruined Boeing's reputation, the total costs of the 737 MAX programme is now exceeding $14 billion -- i.e. $4 billion for R&D and $10 billion ++ for the grounding -- and the costs are mounting up in such a way that it is now on a path where it could soon exceed the total costs of development for the A380.

If that's such an easy question to answer, why not wait till you can make a better answer than "it could soon exceed the total costs of development for the A380"?

Why not wait till MAX is back in service for a year or two and we can get a better evaluation, and then we can start adding in all the non-developmental costs for the A380 and its operators as the book value of the fleet approaches scrap and after most of these carriers admit they haven't been able to make any money flying them?

For every EK singing the praises it seems we have outfits like AF, MH, TG, and soon to be others saying they can't make money with them.

I'd love to see if NH is making money flying A380s with tourists between Japan and Hawaii, it would be a minor miracle if they are.
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
 
9Patch
Topic Author
Posts: 405
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:20 pm

Strato2 wrote:
DEATHS:

737MAX: 347
A380: 0

As life is priceless the 737MAX has already utterly failed and is the biggest failure in commercial aviation.


If you're using body count as the metric, the DC-10 is a bigger failure:

As of September 2015, the DC-10 had been involved in 55 accidents and incidents including 32 hull-loss accidents, with 1,261 occupant fatalities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell ... _incidents
 
Baldr
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2019 1:10 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:23 pm

Revelation wrote:
Baldr wrote:
asr0dzjq wrote:
Exactly! I myself, at least, easily consider the A380 to be the biggest failure in commercial aviation. Mainly due to the fact that when it came to the A380, Airbus were pretty much exactly wrong.

Biggest failure in commercial aviation?

That's an easy question to answer.

It's the 737 MAX.

Apart from the fact that the 737 MAX has majorly ruined Boeing's reputation, the total costs of the 737 MAX programme is now exceeding $14 billion -- i.e. $4 billion for R&D and $10 billion ++ for the grounding -- and the costs are mounting up in such a way that it is now on a path where it could soon exceed the total costs of development for the A380.

If that's such an easy question to answer, why not wait till you can make a better answer than "it could soon exceed the total costs of development for the A380"?

Why not wait till MAX is back in service for a year or two and we can get a better evaluation, and then we can start adding in all the non-developmental costs for the A380 and its operators as the book value of the fleet approaches scrap and after most of these carriers admit they haven't been able to make any money flying them?

For every EK singing the praises it seems we have outfits like AF, MH, TG, and soon to be others saying they can't make money with them.

I'd love to see if NH is making money flying A380s with tourists between Japan and Hawaii, it would be a minor miracle if they are.


It's an easy question to answer because the 737 MAX has ruined Boeing's reputation not only in the industry, but with the travelling public as well.

In contrast, the A380 turned out to be an impressive technical achievement that enhanced not only Airbus's reputation in the industry, but with the travelling public as well. From most passengers' perspective, its the nicest, quietest, most comfortable plane to fly on.

Why not wait till MAX is back in service for a year or two and we can get a better evaluation,


That's fine with me if it makes you feel better.

However, it won't materially change anything if the total costs to Boeing for R&D and grounding of the MAX do not exceed the total costs to Airbus for the A380 -- it's getting likelier by the day that the numbers will be in the same ballpark.

and then we can start adding in all the non-developmental costs for the A380 and its operators as the book value of the fleet approaches scrap and after most of these carriers admit they haven't been able to make any money flying them?


Airbus has already taken a €463m charge for shutdown costs, so if you're counting on additional end-of-programme costs popping up, you may have to wait a long time.

As for your last point, did the respective OEM's have to cover operator costs -- after programme shutdown -- for such aircraft as the L1011, MD-90, MD-95/717, MD-11, or is there a different standard for the A380?
 
speedbird52
Posts: 832
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 7:06 pm

asr0dzjq wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
the success of Airbus was that the A380 Flew, The Failure was? It Flew! But by the time they had it ready to sell? The market moved to Point to Point and nobody needed super hubs anymore to get overseas to the east or to the west. And? Nobody needs to get there via Dubai Much to the chagrin of Emirates. They got suckered in by their OWN arrogance. but they might have the corner on some nice restaurants, As that may be all the A380 till be good for, They would make Dandy Theme Restaurants.


The market didn't move. It was never there in the first place. Don't think that the world abandoned the A380 when it never accepted it before.

Exactly! I myself, at least, easily consider the A380 to be the biggest failure in commercial aviation. Mainly due to the fact that when it came to the A380, Airbus were pretty much exactly wrong.

Really? The biggest failure?

Image

On another note, since when did the world move to point to point long hauls? Pretty sure Emirates, British Airways, Lufthansa, Qantas, KLM, Air France, and basically every legacy carrier all operate by point-hub-point
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21935
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 7:50 pm

Baldr wrote:
As for your last point, did the respective OEM's have to cover operator costs -- after programme shutdown -- for such aircraft as the L1011, MD-90, MD-95/717, MD-11, or is there a different standard for the A380?

Nope, but the money has to come from somewhere, presumably by airlines increasing prices on flights that do make money.

Good thing for Boeing that 737 will make lots of money for its operators once it returns to service, bad reputation or not.

Bad thing for Airbus that A380 operators are retiring 10 year old A380s since they can't make money with them, good reputation or not.
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
 
asr0dzjq
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:36 am

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:12 pm

speedbird52 wrote:
Really? The biggest failure?

Yes, IMO.

speedbird52 wrote:
On another note, since when did the world move to point to point long hauls? Pretty sure Emirates, British Airways, Lufthansa, Qantas, KLM, Air France, and basically every legacy carrier all operate by point-hub-point

The trend is point-to-point. I never said there won't be any hubs.

Revelation wrote:
Baldr wrote:
As for your last point, did the respective OEM's have to cover operator costs -- after programme shutdown -- for such aircraft as the L1011, MD-90, MD-95/717, MD-11, or is there a different standard for the A380?

Nope, but the money has to come from somewhere, presumably by airlines increasing prices on flights that do make money.

Good thing for Boeing that [737 Max] will make lots of money for its operators once it returns to service, [regardless of how good or bad its reputation is.]

Bad thing for Airbus that A380 operators are retiring 10 year old A380s since they can't make money with them, good reputation or not.

And we've seen both 9V-SKA and 9V-SKB not only get retired, but scrapped after just 13-14 years. And thank you for being reasonable, being realistic, and for not trying to force an agenda down people's throats.
R.I.P.

Pan Am (B 19-10-1927, D 4-12-1991)
TWA (B 1-10-1930, D 1-12-2001)
Douglas (B 22-7-1921, D 23-5-2006)
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1294
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:09 pm

9Patch wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
DEATHS:

737MAX: 347
A380: 0

As life is priceless the 737MAX has already utterly failed and is the biggest failure in commercial aviation.


If you're using body count as the metric, the DC-10 is a bigger failure:

As of September 2015, the DC-10 had been involved in 55 accidents and incidents including 32 hull-loss accidents, with 1,261 occupant fatalities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell ... _incidents

And, ironically, it's now in Boeing's historical portfolio...
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5499
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:56 pm

Hey, if they want another success I can give them a real shortcut. Just wire me $25 billion or so and save a whole bunch of time and aggravation. I’m willing to help.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2726
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:25 pm

SEPilot wrote:
Hey, if they want another success I can give them a real shortcut. Just wire me $25 billion or so and save a whole bunch of time and aggravation. I’m willing to help.


Oooh same deal. I'll also work on a circular runway idea too. After all I can convert it to a race track like other airports have been.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3273
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:36 pm

FACTS

A CEO has to sugarcoat his company failures.
The A380 is a Tech Marvel
They learned a lot of stuff by going BIG (remember the Apollo program?)
The A380 tech and software permeated to a lot of improvements and Airbus products
Yep they lost a lot on the business side of it.
People love to fly the A380

Any company worth their salt will make expensive mistakes for the sake of advancement.
They did not want to get burned by the market, and they did but its not the worst ever...so lets not compare it with other failures because its only a failure if YOU DONT LEARN FROM IT.

Im flying in the A380 next saturday and I love the Darn aircraft. Yep it was not a business success but I am glad they did it...

Boeing had to bite a very hard bullet on the 788 development, and to this day that super Tech has not permeated new and exciting products and they should in my humble opinion. That is a worse mistake, Boeing should have done the 797 for the next 50 years in mind, instead we got 300+ paperwights ex.pecting fixes and that for me is bigger mistake..


BEST REGARDS
TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
9Patch
Topic Author
Posts: 405
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:12 am

WayexTDI wrote:
9Patch wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
DEATHS:

737MAX: 347
A380: 0

As life is priceless the 737MAX has already utterly failed and is the biggest failure in commercial aviation.


If you're using body count as the metric, the DC-10 is a bigger failure:

As of September 2015, the DC-10 had been involved in 55 accidents and incidents including 32 hull-loss accidents, with 1,261 occupant fatalities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell ... _incidents

And, ironically, it's now in Boeing's historical portfolio...

And, ironically, the rooster crowing causes the sun to rise...
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1294
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:52 am

9Patch wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
9Patch wrote:

If you're using body count as the metric, the DC-10 is a bigger failure:


And, ironically, it's now in Boeing's historical portfolio...

And, ironically, the rooster crowing causes the sun to rise...

OK... And???
 
Kent350787
Posts: 1087
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:06 am

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:04 am

Revelation wrote:
Sokes wrote:
Airbus also told us the A380 would be a natural fit for China and other emerging/growing markets in Asia, and it seems despite many visits from EU politicians and Airbus executives they never were able to grow their market beyond the one CN order.


I do wonder what impact the Chinese regulatory environment had on that. Here in Sydney we get get about 15 flights daily from a dozen different mainland Chinese airlines (some sub-brands) (including one CS A380). Would there have been more H2H if extra capacity hadn't been forced to depart from 2nd and 3rd rank ports?

Slot restricted hubs like Sydney were also seen as A380 bread and butter. Again, we have multiple daily QF (of course), SQ, EK and EY A380s, as well as daily QR, CS, KE (seasonal) and OZ (seasonal). Although our second airport should be running once the A380 is retired, it's hard to see sufficient capacity coming form the alternatives.
 
speedbird52
Posts: 832
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:08 am

asr0dzjq wrote:
speedbird52 wrote:
Really? The biggest failure?

Yes, IMO.

speedbird52 wrote:
On another note, since when did the world move to point to point long hauls? Pretty sure Emirates, British Airways, Lufthansa, Qantas, KLM, Air France, and basically every legacy carrier all operate by point-hub-point

The trend is point-to-point. I never said there won't be any hubs.


And we've seen both 9V-SKA and 9V-SKB not only get retired, but scrapped after just 13-14 years. And thank you for being reasonable, being realistic, and for not trying to force an agenda down people's throats.

I disagree. The trend is clearly NOT point to point. It is point-hub. I cannot think of a single point-point route that opened up, but I can name several new point-hub or hub-hub route. Another thing I want to mention is a lot of airports once considered "spokes" are now hubs. A case example would be Seattle
 
9Patch
Topic Author
Posts: 405
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:26 am

speedbird52 wrote:
I disagree. The trend is clearly NOT point to point. It is point-hub. I cannot think of a single point-point route that opened up, but I can name several new point-hub or hub-hub route. Another thing I want to mention is a lot of airports once considered "spokes" are now hubs. A case example would be Seattle


All hubs are a point, but all points are not a hub.

So even a H2P is also P2P.

If you had a choice to fly either H2P or H2H2P, which would you choose?
 
WBM
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 6:50 am

9Patch wrote:
speedbird52 wrote:
I disagree. The trend is clearly NOT point to point. It is point-hub. I cannot think of a single point-point route that opened up, but I can name several new point-hub or hub-hub route. Another thing I want to mention is a lot of airports once considered "spokes" are now hubs. A case example would be Seattle


All hubs are a point, but all points are not a hub.

So even a H2P is also P2P.

If you had a choice to fly either H2P or H2H2P, which would you choose?

Well said! Perhaps point to point is a poorly named strategy when as you point out both hubs and spokes are in fact points. Personally I think the important question is not yes or know, but how much. Almost every airline will use a combination of strategies. The question is how much are they using of each strategy, and in which direction is the strategy changing toward.
 
User avatar
Lingon
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:40 am

Baldr wrote:
Biggest failure in commercial aviation?

That's an easy question to answer.

It's the 737 MAX.


If the MAX does not become ungrounded and the new planes waiting to be delivered will be scrapped - yes. But exactly how likely is that? More likely is that the MAX will start flying again, after some time when it has proven itself it will start gaining orders and when, in some ten or fifteen years, it is discontinued we will have the answers if it was overall a financial success or not.

Then compare that to, for example, the TU-144.....

Saying the loss-making A380 was a success is a PR spin, but IMHO saying it was a complete disaster isn't very accurate either. It is a good plane, it just isn't the optimal fit for more than a small fraction of the market and thus sales was a disappointment. Still enough to keep the plane manufactured for well over a decade. Airbus went on, the company isn't threatened. Some lessons learned has helped with the A350.

I hope to fly on one some day before they disappear completely.
 
speedbird52
Posts: 832
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:47 am

9Patch wrote:
speedbird52 wrote:
I disagree. The trend is clearly NOT point to point. It is point-hub. I cannot think of a single point-point route that opened up, but I can name several new point-hub or hub-hub route. Another thing I want to mention is a lot of airports once considered "spokes" are now hubs. A case example would be Seattle


All hubs are a point, but all points are not a hub.

So even a H2P is also P2P.

If you had a choice to fly either H2P or H2H2P, which would you choose?

This isn't about my choice, this is about what airlines fly. Which is P2H2P, or H2H2P
 
Sokes
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:17 am

Wildlander wrote:
The A340-600 was foreseen as a 747 replacement at a time when Boeing had appeared to be unable to develop the 777-300 into a range-capable challenger. Boeing went on the develop the 300ER more than was deemed possible and the rest is history.


That explains a lot.


Kent350787 wrote:
I do wonder what impact the Chinese regulatory environment had on that.
...Would there have been more H2H if extra capacity hadn't been forced to depart from 2nd and 3rd rank ports?


That also explains a lot. Can you expand on that?
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
Kent350787
Posts: 1087
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:06 am

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 11:09 am

Sokes wrote:
Wildlander wrote:
The A340-600 was foreseen as a 747 replacement at a time when Boeing had appeared to be unable to develop the 777-300 into a range-capable challenger. Boeing went on the develop the 300ER more than was deemed possible and the rest is history.


That explains a lot.


Kent350787 wrote:
I do wonder what impact the Chinese regulatory environment had on that.
...Would there have been more H2H if extra capacity hadn't been forced to depart from 2nd and 3rd rank ports?


That also explains a lot. Can you expand on that?


eg. https://blueswandaily.com/its-time-for- ... ul-policy/
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1419
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 11:11 am

I think the 346 was positioned to replace 742s coming to the end of their lives, and the 380 to outflank the 744 and credible developments of it from above.

The 777 did a better job in most scenarios than the 346, and subsequent engine development and other innovations in the 787 and 350 undermined the case for the overbuilt initial 380 model, the 388.
 
cpd
Posts: 6042
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Wed Dec 04, 2019 11:12 am

Revelation wrote:
The issue for EK is that all it takes is something like Project Sunrise or a point to point flight on a smaller plane to come along and skim off the premium passengers and flip many flights from profit to loss. I think the need to go further afield at a smaller airplane size is why EK took 789 instead of 78X like most people expected..


Sunrise or whatever you want to call it only works where there is sufficient passenger numbers to support it. Unless you are going between decently big city pairs, then it's not going to be possible.

Sydney to Nice non-stop, or Sydney to Geneva non-stop (or to another smaller city), I can't see that happening. The plane wouldn't be filled sufficiently to make it worthwhile.

Sydney London or Sydney-New York are nice, but those are big major cities. I can't see it working to smaller cities. I'm not flying to London, it's pointless - I'd have to then turn around and fly another hour or so to get to mainland Europe, that's pointless.

So I may as well go with Emirates and take an overnight stop-over in a comfortable hotel in Dubai then arrive rested mid-afternoon in Switzerland, have a quick transfer by road to France (arriving in 5pm) and then have a decent meal, sleep overnight and I'm fresh for the next day (which is important).
 
JonesNL
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Wed Dec 04, 2019 1:29 pm

cpd wrote:
Revelation wrote:
The issue for EK is that all it takes is something like Project Sunrise or a point to point flight on a smaller plane to come along and skim off the premium passengers and flip many flights from profit to loss. I think the need to go further afield at a smaller airplane size is why EK took 789 instead of 78X like most people expected..


Sunrise or whatever you want to call it only works where there is sufficient passenger numbers to support it. Unless you are going between decently big city pairs, then it's not going to be possible.

Sydney to Nice non-stop, or Sydney to Geneva non-stop (or to another smaller city), I can't see that happening. The plane wouldn't be filled sufficiently to make it worthwhile.

Sydney London or Sydney-New York are nice, but those are big major cities. I can't see it working to smaller cities. I'm not flying to London, it's pointless - I'd have to then turn around and fly another hour or so to get to mainland Europe, that's pointless.

So I may as well go with Emirates and take an overnight stop-over in a comfortable hotel in Dubai then arrive rested mid-afternoon in Switzerland, have a quick transfer by road to France (arriving in 5pm) and then have a decent meal, sleep overnight and I'm fresh for the next day (which is important).


You are right about the smaller cities, but what about Sydney to Paris, Sydney to Zurich, Sydney to Munchen or even Sydney to Amsterdam. These are major feeders for the Emirates network and it will kill there complete profitability if they lose the traffic from the major capitols of Europe. You underestimate the amount of people who pay an premium to have an direct flight, which in the end increases profitability of the airlines whom perform these flights. See the premium heavy flight from Singapore to New York, usually fully booked and extremely profitable.
 
9Patch
Topic Author
Posts: 405
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: A380 was success for Airbus, says new CEO

Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:08 pm

speedbird52 wrote:
9Patch wrote:
speedbird52 wrote:
I disagree. The trend is clearly NOT point to point. It is point-hub. I cannot think of a single point-point route that opened up, but I can name several new point-hub or hub-hub route. Another thing I want to mention is a lot of airports once considered "spokes" are now hubs. A case example would be Seattle


All hubs are a point, but all points are not a hub.

So even a H2P is also P2P.

If you had a choice to fly either H2P or H2H2P, which would you choose?

This isn't about my choice, this is about what airlines fly. Which is P2H2P, or H2H2P


Airlines also fly H2P and I choose that whenever I can. I'm willing to pay more for it.
The also fly P2H2H2P and if you can eliminate one of those stops, it's a good thing.
 
Sokes
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Airbus Boss Does Not Regret A380 Decision

Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:41 pm

JonesNL wrote:
...what about Sydney to Paris, Sydney to Zurich, Sydney to Munchen or even Sydney to Amsterdam. These are major feeders for the Emirates network and it will kill there complete profitability if they lose the traffic from the major capitols of Europe.


Paris may work.
Sydney to Munich is only going to happen if Lufthansa can collect people from all German (and North Italian) cities in Munich first.
Yes, if one prohibits Emirates from flying to Berlin somebody from Berlin may indeed be forced to fly via Munich.
More likely however he will find any other and cheaper stop: Bangkok or Singapur or even Hong Kong. Even Istanbul would be better.

A seven abreast plane for long range may change the situation somehow. But even then I believe Sydney is out of question for direct flights to Germany. No New York or London there. Another question is how many flights to e.g. Singapur or Shanghai Germany could sustain.

This discussion proofs that aviation fuel is too cheap.
It's fun to read how the Indian leader Nehru took planes to fly to Europe.
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?

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