Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
PaxPicti
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:37 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Fri Nov 15, 2019 8:34 pm

Airbus was right to build the A380. You can't predict the future and it might have been a huge success. They may have lost money on the R&D if it's divided by the number of frames, but much of what they learned by doing it is applicable to future projects.

Airbus was also right to cancel the A380. It failed to be a commercial success, and as it stands there's pretty strong evidence that it never would be. They can't go on building products that no-one wants and selling them at a loss, or even at a tiny profit.

The two things are not mutually exclusive.

If Airbus should never have built it, then Boeing should never have built the 747 either - at the time they could not have predicted that it would be the enormous long-term success that it has. The irony is that it's now certain that the last 747 - admittedly F, not pax - will be built after the last A380, and it's even possible that it could be after the last A380 is retired. The double irony is that it's exactly because it was designed to be converted into a freighter in the first place that this is so... but Boeing were still out on the time scale by more than 40 years.

And if there is ever to be another VLA in the future, it will be different from either of them - but I would bet that Airbus now has a better idea of how to build it than Boeing.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1722
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Fri Nov 15, 2019 8:40 pm

wjcandee wrote:
If the enviro-folks had their way, we would see very-infrequent flights of an even-larger A380 between major city-pairs, and then people could bike. I jest, but the point is that a large a/c run infrequently, if properly configured (and I agree with Lightsabre on the design-inefficiencies of the thing) is gonna be more-environmentally-friendly, even if the investment in airport infrastructure would be less-used and the capital costs less-spread-around, making each flight more expensive, blah-blah.

Based on CORSIA workshop feedback, and high level thinking at the UN and ICAO, that's precisely the direction envisaged. The unknowns, are how soon and to what extent.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 10682
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Fri Nov 15, 2019 8:43 pm

smartplane wrote:
wjcandee wrote:
If the enviro-folks had their way, we would see very-infrequent flights of an even-larger A380 between major city-pairs, and then people could bike. I jest, but the point is that a large a/c run infrequently, if properly configured (and I agree with Lightsabre on the design-inefficiencies of the thing) is gonna be more-environmentally-friendly, even if the investment in airport infrastructure would be less-used and the capital costs less-spread-around, making each flight more expensive, blah-blah.

Based on CORSIA workshop feedback, and high level thinking at the UN and ICAO, that's precisely the direction envisaged. The unknowns, are how soon and to what extent.


Awesome. Nothing like the government using a "crisis" to impose their will. I love "high level thinkers". Too bad they can't tie their own shoelaces. I met many in my blue-chip academic career. Most didn't know how to drive, and few had ever been to a bar. So happy to have folks with that kind of life experience making decisions for me.
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1469
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Fri Nov 15, 2019 11:03 pm

Today I have seen, between the BMW i3, Nissan Leaf, Tesla Model 3, Renault Zoe, Peugeot Ion, Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, BMW 3E Series, about 30 electrical vehicles.
I've walked passed 10 electrical charging points.
The electrification is fast-tracking.

So today everyone looks at something like the B787 and A350 and says WOW.
What will be WOW in 10 years ago?

The A380 is not old technology by any means.
Full FBW, wild frequency electrical system with aluminum wiring, composites all over the place, including extensive use of CFRP.
Engines a generation better than than the A330CEO/half a generation newer than the B77W.
A modern flight deck on par with the A350.

Sure, the A380 needs some different thinking.
When you divert or have IRROPS, you need to find bigger hotels to accommodate stranded pax.
You need bigger check-in facilities, but we are more and more walking away towards self check-in, so not for long.
Luggage is becoming optional in economy, even on long haul.
The A380 doesn't need a double deck boarding bridge/facilities, a single deck and (stowable) stairs in the middle of the aircraft are sufficient.
It's fuel effiency per pax in the densest configuration beats any other aircraft.

The A380 has hit the market at an unfortunate time.
As someone pointed out, it EISed in the middle of a global banking crisis, making financing difficult.
Then a wave of new smaller and flashy aircraft EISed, creating an overabundance of widebody jets on the market, as the aircraft they replaced stayed on the market.
Then oil prices dropped making older widebodies still compelling to keep flying.
This same overabundance of widebodies is making sales difficult on a wide range of new widebodies, from the B788 that isn't selling anymore, the A338 that never sold, the A339 meeeh, the B789/A350/B777X are selling ok but only when discounted to blue chips.
It will take a couple of years to see the market absorb this overabundance, but be certain that it will be absorbed. Moreover, this will probably fall together with a massive replacement cycle, for the end of life A330CEO/B747/B767/B777, but also some blue chip that retire aircraft young.

Airport infrastructure congestion is one problem, but what about airspace management?
One question: what will happen when the 500 MAXes that are parked in Seattle start flying again in a tsunami of capacity hitting the market, then join the A320NEO's and the A220 to be delivered at a record pace?
It will be short of a disaster, believe me. In the peak of the summer of 2021 (perhaps already in 2020 if the MAX gets a green light early enough in 2020), we will be stuck on the ground for hours waiting for slots, we will see the EU CFMU slot system progressively converted to a tight 5-minute slot instead of the actual 15 with boarding starting sooner and closing sooner.
In 5 years, the remaining wiggle room will be absorbed and then the only way to grow will be with bigger aircraft.

The current traffic and airspace still has enough wiggle room. By 2025, this wiggle room will be consumed and then smaller aircraft will be penalised.

The below 2019 projections from 2014 have already been met in 2018 with 8.2 trillion passenger-kilometers.
2019 has seen an unstopped growth rate, capped only by increased fares, the MAX crisis and a few airlines going bust.
For 2020, I already see a lot of yield pressure, so much so that I have already booked most of my trips through September. Airlines are definitely bracing for a major battle.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVTO5o8WsAApmXX.jpg
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 9100
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:43 am

UA772IAD wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
N47 wrote:

I agree.

As i see it: As the global population increases, more and more airports will become slot constrained and the solution will shift towards VLA. In some places this is already happening, look at how many A380s (of different airlines) you can see at LAX or JFK.


Airport builders are acquiring enough land for future growth. They are not repeating the mistakes of 50-100-year-old airports. VLAs are relevant to just Super Hub to Super Hub routes. There is only a handful of those. Just because LHR is congested, the other point may not be the same.


Where are you referring to specifically? DWC? Beijing?

I disagree with you, and agree with the the original comments, because this is certainly true in the West- particularly in the context of Europe and North America. In Europe, the busiest airports are slot constrained, have curfews, and outside of terminal renovations and small additions, have not really grown outside of their footprints. LHR still doesn't have its third runway, FRA got a new runway, and MUC, will eventually get one after spending the last few years in litigation fighting major opposition to the runway expansion.

In the United States, we haven't built a major international airport since DEN in 1995, and I think a project like that today, in a major American city is almost unthinkable for a variety of political, social and logistical reasons. The same holds true for Canada's 3 busiest airports. It simply boils down to- where are you going to put it and how are you going to make it happen?

Finally, looking at the bigger picture, at least in Europe- we are continuing to see a fundamental change in view towards growth. I expect Europe to be the first place where uncapped, unregulated growth is put back in the bottle. In America, its a deeper discussion (not for here) as to whether capitalism and growth can be put back in the bottle. Now, whether we'll see that in the form of the return of VLAs and a reduction in short haul frequencies, or the increase of alternatives to airplane travel on certain sectors- that will be an interesting thing to watch. I think the KLM comments about the future of air travel are somewhat telling...


DTW McNamara opened in 2002.

For metros with multiple airports, underground subway connection is the best option to increase utilization. JFK-LGA-EWR working as one airport. IAD-DCA-BWI as one.

Legacy European airports can pick/build an unrestricted airport and connect it to main airport or city center. London, being experts in underground tubes, not sure why British didn't implement this plan.

ORD spent on Code-F infrastructure, only to realize A380 will be discontinued.

EK is an airline with two end-of-life airframes. They won't be able to compete with anybody in future. I think A320XLR EIS, put a major dent in their EU revenue.

Just 14 F with showers on an A321XLR will be more luxurious and attractive to premium pax than an A380 with 500 lower class fellow passengers.
 
TSA125
Posts: 133
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 9:56 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:00 am

StudiodeKadent wrote:
Sir Tim Clark is obviously an highly-intelligent man but I simply think that the A380 just doesn't work for any airline which isn't Emirates or perhaps Singapore Airlines. The only other airlines I know of which should've seriously been looking at A380s are Cathay, VS and BA (to deal with their central hubs being slot-controlled), but we all know the political situation in HK is deteriorating (thus lowering long-term demand for travel to and from Hong Kong) and both HKIA and Heathrow are getting third runways relatively soon. And Virgin Atlantic cancelled their A380s so clearly they couldn't fill those planes at respectable yields.

The A380 has suboptimal economics unless the jets are filled and the fleet is relatively large.

I think a lot of STC's "yay A380" mentality comes from the fact that Emirates have made huge specific-to-the-A380 investments, and thus the phasing out of the A380 damages them and forces a change in their business model. I think he's quite aware that the A380 just doesn't make sense for almost every other airline besides Emirates.


Precisely! Clark seems to think that the A380 is a one-size-fits-all solution. No doubt he's still in the camp that thinks even DL fumbled by not taking up any A380s. :duck:
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3425
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:06 am

The frustration he seems to have does not seem to compute in any logical reasoning.

The A380 does not work for some operators as they can’t fill it tear round on most of their network, so adding more and more seats into it likely makes the challenge worse, not better.

It has been used as a premium heavy configured plane by many to use its space effectively to meet their business models without trying to fit in 700 seats.

At the end of the day, Airbus spoke to customers, listened and decided it was time to move on. Nothing wrong with that.
 
emiratesdriver
Posts: 294
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 9:04 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 3:24 am

Anyone who is anyone within EK has admitted that they got it wrong with the 380 in terms of numbers and missions. EK needed around 40 frames to operate the mission the jet was designed for, Clark in his hubris decided he knew better and has been proven a fool yet again.
In EK service the aircraft has NEVER been profitable as a fleet, it HAS been a maintenance disaster and it has most definitely drained income and innovation away from areas where EK could still maintain a competitive advantage.
Little Timmy is merely mouthing off to deflect from his glaringly obvious and continually predicted mistakes.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 3:27 am

Cointrin330 wrote:
What works for EK works for no one else. In the end, the amount of money wasted to reinforce runways, taxiways, build special gate access, and service a plane that was built with the intention of eclipsing the 747 (something of a corporate vanity project) that cost billions and will never recoup R&D costs, could have been spent elsewhere in the aviation industry that had to adapt and prioritize for the A380. Ultimately, the A380 was undone by the twin-engine aircraft market shared by both Airbus & Boeing in the 787 and A350 models. It is EK's model that is potentially at risk. The 787/A350 and presumably future twin engine jets will eventually make DXB essentially a hub that can be bypassed.


Has it not been for EK, the A380 would have been dropped many years ago. No US carrier has them or on order and other carriers are not renewing leases. The prospects for selling or leasing used A380's is dismal. It was a failed experiment.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3841
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:04 am

strfyr51 wrote:
The A380 was solely developed for Vanity, When they pitched the airplane to United they did so because at one point United had 56 747-422's in the field and they thought United could field 16 A380's to replace the 747's. trouble was? Other than SFO there wasn't a Hangar on the system large enough for he A380, Nor were there Jacks nor support equipment large enough to handle the A380... since Airbus didn't ask what anybody Needed before announcing nd building the A380? They pissed away good sales of the A350 or even the A330 because by then United had 56 B777's as welll as the B747's. What would we have needed the A380 for?
American, Delta, Northwest and USAir weren't going to buy it American and Delta didn't even fly any 747's until the NW merger. American nor USAir were going to fly the 747 much Less the A380. . So that airplane was bridge too far. And at that time? There WAS no Emirates.to speak of.. They came along pretty suddenly to prominence amd sought to throw their weight around.. Like the time they went into Atlanta and Delta wouldn't move their airplane to make room for their A380. That was when the ME3 went to war with the US3.


Delta flew 747's in the early 1970's. American flew 747-100's & 747SP's over the years.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22689
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:13 am

I can only imagine the finance terms offered EK on the last A380s are not pleasing. There will be no discernable spare part value for the last frames

Lightsaber
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 14118
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:36 am

tommy1808 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
ethernal wrote:
So... higher CASM at a larger gauge is now "innovating"? :)

Where are you getting "higher CASM" from?

out of a dark place.
It is quite obvious that a 10AB Y/great J-Class A380 has at least the same CASM as a 10 AB Y, 7 AB J 77W since EK would not have flown a much bigger, more expensive plane in those quantities

So in other words, nothing but anecdotal supposition....



JustSomeDood wrote:
I'd counter by saying that it's easier to justify operating different aircraft types if there's sufficient numbers of each to achieve critical mass & economies of scale in terms of MX/certifications/training etc. It's much easier to justify integrating a dedicated sub-fleet if it's 40 frames instead of 5.

Generally speaking, yes.

The point, as now thrice expressed, was that no one here has sufficient information to factually state the line where the benefits of commonality exceeds the benefits of having the most capable aircraft for a specific operation type, particularly in a niche operation like 18hr+ flights. So for them to definitively state that there's "no chance of a mixed order" is simply posturing, as is anyone definitively claiming that there will be a split. We simply don't know the raw data behind QF's analysis at this time.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2573
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:36 am

emiratesdriver wrote:
Anyone who is anyone within EK has admitted that they got it wrong with the 380 in terms of numbers and missions. EK needed around 40 frames to operate the mission the jet was designed for, Clark in his hubris decided he knew better and has been proven a fool yet again.
In EK service the aircraft has NEVER been profitable as a fleet, it HAS been a maintenance disaster and it has most definitely drained income and innovation away from areas where EK could still maintain a competitive advantage.
Little Timmy is merely mouthing off to deflect from his glaringly obvious and continually predicted mistakes.


Had he bought 30 fewer A380's and was a little less 'grand' with DWC, it could be finished by now. I would venture proper fleet planning for EK with the one hub being possibly 50 A380's, the 77W and the upcoming 77X fit best with about 70% of current, but then both A330's and 787's to handle the smaller demand routes. It is weird that their smallest plane currently is the 77L I believe, it might be the 77W.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2573
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:40 am

lightsaber wrote:
I can only imagine the finance terms offered EK on the last A380s are not pleasing. There will be no discernable spare part value for the last frames

Lightsaber


It is probably here are the payments to lease the 12 years, no residual or return payments, besides you get to keep it. Those lease payments need to pay off in the 12 years not 20+ originally anticipated.
 
Sokes
Posts: 2773
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:49 am

Aither wrote:

Actually he should thank these CEOs because their risk averse attitude is the primary reason why these middle east carriers grew so rapidly : ME3s are carrying the passengers other carriers don't want to carry.



High risk, high reward?



tommy1808 wrote:
Sokes wrote:
And while the OEW of the A380 is a joke to fly from Arabian Gulf to Europe, .


by that token every widebody is a joke to fly from the Arabian Gulf to Europe....

best regards
Thomas


OEW A380 = 277 t ...... 277 t / 853 economy passenger............ = 325 kg/ economy passenger OEW
OEW B777-300ER = 168 t .... 168 t / 550 economy passengers = 305 kg/ economy passenger OEW
OEW A330-300 = 129 t .... 129 t / 440 passengers .....................= 293 kg / economy passenger OEW
OEW A321 = 48,5 t / 230 economy passenger............................ = 211 kg / economy passenger OEW
MTOW A321 = 93,5 t .....93,5 t / 236 economy passenger ..........= 396 kg / economy passenger MTOW

You are of course right that each widebody has much more OEW / seat than an A321.
However other widebodies also carry considerable cargo.
In that sense an A380 from Arabian gulf to Europe is better compared with A321.


Noshow wrote:
As a passenger I like the A380. What I don't understand is why airlines phase it out now? There are hub to hub routes and there is more passenger demand compared to like twenty or ten years ago.
...
And especially I wonder why Emirates that has the biggest fleet and successfully used it as a spectacular tool to create a global profile now suddenly U-turns and moves away from the A380.


BA plans to retire it's last B747-400 in 2024. Are A380s really get phased out?

Why would Emirates not retire some aircraft ?
"Explaining the reason behind the decision, Clark added, “They are under retirement because we’ve got a major overhaul coming up and it’s best to take the old aircraft out – they’re all written down – and take the gear off them rather than buy a $25 million main landing gear. I need two, possibly three, to meet that [overhaul] requirement.” "
https://simpleflying.com/emirates-a380- ... etirement/

Isn't it normal that early models get retired fast to satisfy the most pressing spare parts need?
And if Emirates doesn't retire any A380s, in which bargaining position does it put them if they want to buy some planes coming of lease?
I asked before: Who has retired A380s so far?

Earlier Lufthansa's A340s had to compete with Emirate's A380s.
In future Emirate's A380s have to compete with Lufthansa's B777-9X.
Why should Emirates want more?


Polot wrote:

Really the degree of personalization hurt the A380 when it came to cost. Airbus got too swept up in lounges and casinos to sell the glamor of the A380 that they shifted too far towards bespoke when the industry OEMs (including Airbus!) have been moving towards standardization to keep cost down and increase resale potential.



Good point.


wjcandee wrote:

...
If the enviro-folks had their way, we would see very-infrequent flights of an even-larger A380 between major city-pairs,
...
The market, like it or lump it, has so many more inputs to it than anybody can really model, so it's always a guess.
...


I believe if one flight per day on a 10 hour city pair is more environmental friendly than two flights, it should be one flight.
However if this leads to an old cargo plane flying the same route every three days the argument may not hold.
As a believer in markets I believe higher tax on aviation fuel would lead to best results.

I agree with the importance of the unknown.

I miss here that Airbus tried Glare on a large scale. It's maybe an experiment gone wrong. Did they expect the price to come down once production scales? That doesn't make it an unnecessary experiment.

In 20 years most A380s are retired and engines will be better.
I wouldn't exclude the possibility that a longer A380 with better aspect ratio carbon wing will enter the market.
The technology was not ready to design such a plane when it was designed.
 
PHLCVGAMTK
Posts: 113
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2017 6:50 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 6:24 am

DBCoop3r wrote:
An investment in infrastructure (appreciating asset) over aircraft (depreciating asset) is always better.


Always an underappreciated point in any VLA thread, but it's true, or rather infrastructure depreciates over many decades and not just one or two.

People here focus on the rise of efficient big twins as the reason for the A380's demise, but there was another innovation that probably doomed it out of the gate: the EU3 themselves. As we know them, they only began forming in 2004 with the AFKL merger, four years after the A380 launch. Once the big EU longhaul players all had 3 or more domestic hubs to flow connections over, then like even the pre-consolidation US7, new VLAs no longer made sense in their route networks. After that, only the ME3 and Southeast Asia were left as markets, and that wasn't enough demand to support the program.

The counterfactual where EK doesn't go all-in on A380 orders to fuel meteoric growth, thus leaving enough market share on the table for the EU3 to buy more total A380s than EK did in our reality, doesn't seem very likely to me, as compelling as that narrative is.
 
Ellofiend
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 7:00 am

I reckon it will be inevitable that the ultra-large aircraft will re-enter the market, it's a when not an if. Airports such as LAX, SYD, JFK, LHR, CDG, FRA, SIN, DXB, BKK, and more are constrained as it is, some are expanding and could continue to expand, but many of the central connecting points of the globe are not and cannot expand any further, do we think LHR is going to get a 4th runway? 3rd won't be happening at the current prescribed rate of bureaucracy, JFK is in no condition to expand, CDG, I don't think so...SYD will be complemented with a second airport, time will tell whether anyone will use it, BKK, well they are going places at the moment, unlike the airline and in 10-20 years, more airports will join this list. It may be 10 years it may be 40, all I know is that winter is coming and I agree with Mr Clark that Airbus will be kicking themselves when it does come knocking.
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1343
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:05 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
UA772IAD wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

Airport builders are acquiring enough land for future growth. They are not repeating the mistakes of 50-100-year-old airports. VLAs are relevant to just Super Hub to Super Hub routes. There is only a handful of those. Just because LHR is congested, the other point may not be the same.


Where are you referring to specifically? DWC? Beijing?

I disagree with you, and agree with the the original comments, because this is certainly true in the West- particularly in the context of Europe and North America. In Europe, the busiest airports are slot constrained, have curfews, and outside of terminal renovations and small additions, have not really grown outside of their footprints. LHR still doesn't have its third runway, FRA got a new runway, and MUC, will eventually get one after spending the last few years in litigation fighting major opposition to the runway expansion.

In the United States, we haven't built a major international airport since DEN in 1995, and I think a project like that today, in a major American city is almost unthinkable for a variety of political, social and logistical reasons. The same holds true for Canada's 3 busiest airports. It simply boils down to- where are you going to put it and how are you going to make it happen?

Finally, looking at the bigger picture, at least in Europe- we are continuing to see a fundamental change in view towards growth. I expect Europe to be the first place where uncapped, unregulated growth is put back in the bottle. In America, its a deeper discussion (not for here) as to whether capitalism and growth can be put back in the bottle. Now, whether we'll see that in the form of the return of VLAs and a reduction in short haul frequencies, or the increase of alternatives to airplane travel on certain sectors- that will be an interesting thing to watch. I think the KLM comments about the future of air travel are somewhat telling...


DTW McNamara opened in 2002.

For metros with multiple airports, underground subway connection is the best option to increase utilization. JFK-LGA-EWR working as one airport. IAD-DCA-BWI as one.

Legacy European airports can pick/build an unrestricted airport and connect it to main airport or city center. London, being experts in underground tubes, not sure why British didn't implement this plan.

ORD spent on Code-F infrastructure, only to realize A380 will be discontinued.

EK is an airline with two end-of-life airframes. They won't be able to compete with anybody in future. I think A320XLR EIS, put a major dent in their EU revenue.

Just 14 F with showers on an A321XLR will be more luxurious and attractive to premium pax than an A380 with 500 lower class fellow passengers.


McNamera is a terminal, which replaced an existing terminal. It is not a new build airport.

Underground tunnels connecting neighboring airports are too expensive and complicated. You are talking about areas with massive amounts of subterranean infrastructure. It also does not solve the problem of terminal and airspace congestion, and in the cases of LGA and DCA operations limitations due to runway, apron and taxiway dimensions- not to mention perimeter rules.

European countries will not allow for unrestricted airports for the reasons I listed previously.
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 2028
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:16 am

Waterbomber2 wrote:

The current traffic and airspace still has enough wiggle room. By 2025, this wiggle room will be consumed and then smaller aircraft will be penalised.



:checkmark: :checkmark:


Yes, today the industry worships frequency. Commercially it has become much more important than the hard or the soft product.

One day however, perhaps by 2025 or perhaps later, this will start to change with slot and airspace restrictions coming into play in major airports.

In the very long term, VLA's may well stage a comeback.


Faro
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1343
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:31 am

Faro wrote:
Waterbomber2 wrote:

The current traffic and airspace still has enough wiggle room. By 2025, this wiggle room will be consumed and then smaller aircraft will be penalised.



:checkmark: :checkmark:


Yes, today the industry worships frequency. Commercially it has become much more important than the hard or the soft product.

One day however, perhaps by 2025 or perhaps later, this will start to change with slot and airspace restrictions coming into play in major airports.

In the very long term, VLA's may well stage a comeback.


Faro


I agree- especially if alternative modes of transport aren't viable.
 
VV
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:48 am

emiratesdriver wrote:
Anyone who is anyone within EK has admitted that they got it wrong with the 380 in terms of numbers and missions. EK needed around 40 frames to operate the mission the jet was designed for, Clark in his hubris decided he knew better and has been proven a fool yet again.
In EK service the aircraft has NEVER been profitable as a fleet, it HAS been a maintenance disaster and it has most definitely drained income and innovation away from areas where EK could still maintain a competitive advantage.
Little Timmy is merely mouthing off to deflect from his glaringly obvious and continually predicted mistakes.


This comment is interesting.

Why did he order additional ones recently? Did he do it in spite of the advice given by his staff?
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:58 am

Vladex wrote:
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/emirates-tim-clark-slams-airlines-poor-use-a380/
He is saying that the big state airlines like EU3 have no drive in them to innovate since they have a captive population whereas city states of Dubai and Singapore have to please and attract other people Also he talks about obvious size limitations but not of technical limitations of single deck airlplanes . He also says that it was Airbus that pushed him toward converting an order from A380 to A350/A330.

selected
he CEO of Air France has recently disqualified the A380 as having always been difficult and now obsolete. What is your take on this?

Clark: The A380 was a misfit for Air France. They never scaled, they only have ten aircraft. Yes, we faced the same teething problems, but we dealt with them because we were scaled enough to deal with it.

The whole approach to the A380 at Air France and Lufthansa was ‘just more of the same.’ They lost the opportunity to really define it. They never ordered any more. British Airways didn’t order any more. BA should have had the same number of A380s as we have, hundred of those.

After you only signed the contract to buy more A380s in February last year, all then unravelled fairly quickly afterwards. How come?

Clark: In November 2018 we had a grown-up discussion with Toulouse. It was clear to us that Toulouse was struggling with the aeroplane. They would have continued to build it but on a bespoke basis which would have cost a fortune.

Will there be second thoughts at Airbus about terminating the A380 program?

Clark: Airbus will rue the day that they cancelled the A380.


They only have 7 left to receive. I heard on a tv show that that the last will be manufactured in may 2020.
this
well? I for one can see his point! Were I stuck flying a bunch of white elephants that Nobody wants? And they were virtually NEW? I'd be pissed too! This was a classic CASE of My "Johnson" is bigger than your "Johnson". But if Nobody cares? Then your "Johnson" is worthless!! And? EK has a LOT of useless "Johnsons".
So I can see why hes Hacked off! But then again? He needs to be hacked off at himself! They thought flying that airplane was going to make then the " Talk of the Town". Well? It has! Except people are not only talking? But smirking!!
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1469
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 10:25 am

I disagree with some of the above views about EK.
First of all, I believe EK to be a subsidised entity built so that Dubai could be populated and an artifical economy sustained. Desert land or reclaimed land would be sold high above its value leading to diversification from oil incomes, etc...
I also believe that EK would not be profitable without subsidies and the numbers they post are............. (enough dots?)

However, the A380 was not the wrong choice for their little oasis project. The A380 helped put Dubai on the map. There is no way that they would have achieved their current status with a bunch of A330's and B77W's.
Tim's mission was not to build a profitable airline, but to build a sustainable airline as a motor for a self-sustaining economy.
Not every airline needs to be profitable or even self-sustaining to make sense.
The same reason why cities worldwide build and spend big on subways and public transportation, the Italian government keeps AZ alive, JAL was baiked out by the Japanese governmenta
, and the Dubai Government invests in EK. EK is Dubai's tentacles, with passengers worldwide giving their currencies to get its services.
EK is Dubai's subway in the skies, one that can get you from JFK to DEL, or from TYO to GRU.
The A380 ia just a tool that unifies 3 factors for EK:
1. Marketing factor. Ie, my subway rolling stock is more comfortable. The Wow effect.
2. Cost factor: the A380 has very low unit cost that allows them to offer value. Ie more personal space for the same price. Relates to the marketing factor.
In addition, the A380 gives them operational mass, in terms of RPK, one of the largest airlines in the world. Mass means lower costs per unit as more units share costs.
3. Slot factor. The A380 allows to make most of limitations in terms of slots and traffic rights.


At AF for instance, they don't know what they are anymore. They are not a government airline, they are not offering value to any of their shareholders. When you don't have a purpose it's not the A380 that doesn't make sense, it's every aircraft that doesn't make sense. Do you think that the B787, A350 and A321 will "make AF great again?"
Copy from AF and paste to LH and BA.
LH Passage is barely profitable, BA is only milking investments from the past, and I'm talking about the less than 50 now remaining VLA's that give them mass and profits.

Delta Airlines, 6 billion USD profits annually.
Why? One answer: mass. Atalanta.
Take Atalanta away, and Delta becomes AA.
DL would probably be making more money with a fleet of 30 A380's.

We would have to see what happens when the "good batch" of A380's hits the used market to judge if there really is no demand for the type.
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 2028
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 11:07 am

Waterbomber2 wrote:

First of all, I believe EK to be a subsidised entity built so that Dubai could be populated and an artifical economy sustained. Desert land or reclaimed land would be sold high above its value leading to diversification from oil incomes, etc...



EK's 2018-2019 financial statements are starting on page 106 of the following document:

https://cdn.ek.aero/downloads/ek/pdfs/report/annual_report_2019.pdf

Note No 9 on page 121 sets out that EK pays very little tax:

Emirates has secured tax exemptions by virtue of double taxation agreements and airline reciprocal arrangements in most of the jurisdictions in which it operates.


This low level of taxation is due to the fact that the UAE legally has very little income taxation on corporations as well as the double taxation agreements and not because the UAE government has unilaterally and specifically exempted EK from taxes.

Elsewhere, there is no mention of subsidies, government grants or suchlike financial support. The auditors' opinion on the financial statements on page 101 sets out that these are in compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards IFRS. There is a specific IFRS standard on government grants, IFRS 15. If there are goverment grants, this has to be disclosed in the financial statements. There is no such disclosure. If your statement is true, then PricewaterhouseCoopers --ie, a huge truckload of local and international audit staff + a handful of overseas review partners-- are all in on the conspiracy.


Faro
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 9100
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:50 pm

VV wrote:
emiratesdriver wrote:
Anyone who is anyone within EK has admitted that they got it wrong with the 380 in terms of numbers and missions. EK needed around 40 frames to operate the mission the jet was designed for, Clark in his hubris decided he knew better and has been proven a fool yet again.
In EK service the aircraft has NEVER been profitable as a fleet, it HAS been a maintenance disaster and it has most definitely drained income and innovation away from areas where EK could still maintain a competitive advantage.
Little Timmy is merely mouthing off to deflect from his glaringly obvious and continually predicted mistakes.


This comment is interesting.

Why did he order additional ones recently? Did he do it in spite of the advice given by his staff?


According to a.net pundits, pilots(employee) doesn't know how to run an airline, only Sir Tim Clark knows. He had the big picture. Did he lost the picture or was looking at the wrong picture?

To their credit, for years pilots have been claiming 40-50 is the maximum number of A380s EK can sustain. Allegedly they know if the cabin is not full. Counterclaims by pundits that EK planes are always full squashed that allegation
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4974
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:03 pm

With the coming of the 380 Clark hit upon a business model that somewhat changed the face of flying, especially from Western Europe to SE Asia, much of Africa, and Australia. Then he added the 777W - bingo. With the continued improvements of the 330, the onslaught of the 787 and 350 things are changing again. To maintain Clark's model EK must change. Can EK's OneStop compete with P2P nonstop? And with other airlines OneStop? It has to be only a few hours longer, maybe more comfortable, better terminal experience, but maybe also cheaper. When EK landed in Seattle it was cheaper to almost all of SE Asia, Australia, and much of Africa. No longer.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26566
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:23 pm

Waterbomber2 wrote:
However, the A380 was not the wrong choice for their little oasis project. The A380 helped put Dubai on the map. There is no way that they would have achieved their current status with a bunch of A330's and B77W's.
Tim's mission was not to build a profitable airline, but to build a sustainable airline as a motor for a self-sustaining economy.
Not every airline needs to be profitable or even self-sustaining to make sense.
The same reason why cities worldwide build and spend big on subways and public transportation, the Italian government keeps AZ alive, JAL was baiked out by the Japanese governmenta
, and the Dubai Government invests in EK. EK is Dubai's tentacles, with passengers worldwide giving their currencies to get its services.
EK is Dubai's subway in the skies, one that can get you from JFK to DEL, or from TYO to GRU.
The A380 ia just a tool that unifies 3 factors for EK:
1. Marketing factor. Ie, my subway rolling stock is more comfortable. The Wow effect.
2. Cost factor: the A380 has very low unit cost that allows them to offer value. Ie more personal space for the same price. Relates to the marketing factor.
In addition, the A380 gives them operational mass, in terms of RPK, one of the largest airlines in the world. Mass means lower costs per unit as more units share costs.
3. Slot factor. The A380 allows to make most of limitations in terms of slots and traffic rights.

The question to ask isn't if the A380 was not the wrong choice for their little oasis project, but was 142 A380s the wrong choice for their little oasis project.

The answer is indisputably no because STC has already cancelled the last 14 A380s that were on order, not to mention the putative 20+18 MOU that never got converted to orders.

C'mon, admit it, there was a much earlier point where STC should have read the writing on the wall and reversed course, but now he is stuck with the last A380s off the line that will be a fiscal bloodbath for EK now and the next dozen plus years, just at the time where their competitors have gone to long range point to point 789/A339/A359 service and are eating his lunch.

The fact that he doubles down on his mistake in the press shows what leadership he is providing.

Waterbomber2 wrote:
At AF for instance, they don't know what they are anymore. They are not a government airline, they are not offering value to any of their shareholders. When you don't have a purpose it's not the A380 that doesn't make sense, it's every aircraft that doesn't make sense. Do you think that the B787, A350 and A321 will "make AF great again?"
Copy from AF and paste to LH and BA.
LH Passage is barely profitable, BA is only milking investments from the past, and I'm talking about the less than 50 now remaining VLA's that give them mass and profits.

LOL, BA has just announced record profits, AF sees the moves they make and tries to emulate them. AF's biggest problem is workforce productivity not fleet management. Tagging BA, LH and AF as governmental airlines is nothing more than a crude attempt at distraction.

Waterbomber2 wrote:
Delta Airlines, 6 billion USD profits annually.
Why? One answer: mass. Atalanta.
Take Atalanta away, and Delta becomes AA.
DL would probably be making more money with a fleet of 30 A380's.

DL is mastering the art of matching their fleet to their route network, and buy doing opportunistic aircraft purchases instead of prestige aircraft purchases. STC spends big bucks by making big splashes by buying at top of market. DL eats his lunch by buying when great opportunities present themselves and using in house MRO to prolong fleet life so they can time the new purchases based on opportunistically minimizing capital expenditure.

Besides, you are now supporting the idea that STC should have followed the "investment in infrastructure (appreciating asset) over aircraft (depreciating asset) is always better" maxim so he could have a DWC airport that looks more like ATL rather than being stuck in DXB which looks more like LHR.,

STC picked the style over substance approach by ordering 142 A380s with MOUs taking him to 180 before reality kicked him right in the crotch and forced him to make necessary and now quite late changes.

Now he's stuck with too many whales and not enough beach to land them whilst his competitors fly all around him making the kind of money he hopes to be able to make after a huge transition in his fleet spanning several years to reflect the same approach his competitors have already implemented.

In short, he over shot the mark and is now behind the curve desperately playing catch-up while using bravado as a distraction to mask his mistakes.

It's kind of hard to suggest that all of this will end will for STC and EK.
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1469
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 5:30 pm

Revelation wrote:
Waterbomber2 wrote:
However, the A380 was not the wrong choice for their little oasis project. The A380 helped put Dubai on the map. There is no way that they would have achieved their current status with a bunch of A330's and B77W's.
Tim's mission was not to build a profitable airline, but to build a sustainable airline as a motor for a self-sustaining economy.
Not every airline needs to be profitable or even self-sustaining to make sense.
The same reason why cities worldwide build and spend big on subways and public transportation, the Italian government keeps AZ alive, JAL was baiked out by the Japanese governmenta
, and the Dubai Government invests in EK. EK is Dubai's tentacles, with passengers worldwide giving their currencies to get its services.
EK is Dubai's subway in the skies, one that can get you from JFK to DEL, or from TYO to GRU.
The A380 ia just a tool that unifies 3 factors for EK:
1. Marketing factor. Ie, my subway rolling stock is more comfortable. The Wow effect.
2. Cost factor: the A380 has very low unit cost that allows them to offer value. Ie more personal space for the same price. Relates to the marketing factor.
In addition, the A380 gives them operational mass, in terms of RPK, one of the largest airlines in the world. Mass means lower costs per unit as more units share costs.
3. Slot factor. The A380 allows to make most of limitations in terms of slots and traffic rights.

The question to ask isn't if the A380 was not the wrong choice for their little oasis project, but was 142 A380s the wrong choice for their little oasis project.

The answer is indisputably no because STC has already cancelled the last 14 A380s that were on order, not to mention the putative 20+18 MOU that never got converted to orders.

C'mon, admit it, there was a much earlier point where STC should have read the writing on the wall and reversed course, but now he is stuck with the last A380s off the line that will be a fiscal bloodbath for EK now and the next dozen plus years, just at the time where their competitors have gone to long range point to point 789/A339/A359 service and are eating his lunch.

The fact that he doubles down on his mistake in the press shows what leadership he is providing.

Waterbomber2 wrote:
At AF for instance, they don't know what they are anymore. They are not a government airline, they are not offering value to any of their shareholders. When you don't have a purpose it's not the A380 that doesn't make sense, it's every aircraft that doesn't make sense. Do you think that the B787, A350 and A321 will "make AF great again?"
Copy from AF and paste to LH and BA.
LH Passage is barely profitable, BA is only milking investments from the past, and I'm talking about the less than 50 now remaining VLA's that give them mass and profits.

LOL, BA has just announced record profits, AF sees the moves they make and tries to emulate them. AF's biggest problem is workforce productivity not fleet management. Tagging BA, LH and AF as governmental airlines is nothing more than a crude attempt at distraction.

Waterbomber2 wrote:
Delta Airlines, 6 billion USD profits annually.
Why? One answer: mass. Atalanta.
Take Atalanta away, and Delta becomes AA.
DL would probably be making more money with a fleet of 30 A380's.

DL is mastering the art of matching their fleet to their route network, and buy doing opportunistic aircraft purchases instead of prestige aircraft purchases. STC spends big bucks by making big splashes by buying at top of market. DL eats his lunch by buying when great opportunities present themselves and using in house MRO to prolong fleet life so they can time the new purchases based on opportunistically minimizing capital expenditure.

Besides, you are now supporting the idea that STC should have followed the "investment in infrastructure (appreciating asset) over aircraft (depreciating asset) is always better" maxim so he could have a DWC airport that looks more like ATL rather than being stuck in DXB which looks more like LHR.,

STC picked the style over substance approach by ordering 142 A380s with MOUs taking him to 180 before reality kicked him right in the crotch and forced him to make necessary and now quite late changes.

Now he's stuck with too many whales and not enough beach to land them whilst his competitors fly all around him making the kind of money he hopes to be able to make after a huge transition in his fleet spanning several years to reflect the same approach his competitors have already implemented.

In short, he over shot the mark and is now behind the curve desperately playing catch-up while using bravado as a distraction to mask his mistakes.

It's kind of hard to suggest that all of this will end will for STC and EK.


I think that STC is not the mastermind behind the whole project, he just is the one who executed it.
I think that Dubai's rulers are the real masterminds.

If you read the article and followed the whole unravelling of the A380 saga, it was Airbus' leadership who ended the A380 program.

Like Air France, Airbus doesn't know what its primary purpose is anymore. Airbus' purpose was much like EK's: boosting Europe's economy by creating and maintaining high value jobs, political independence from the U.S., know-how in cutting edge technologies, production and support methods. Except that tons of high value orders have blurred their leadership's vision, as potential to make money has taken hold of managers who started misunderstanding their mission. Along came Tom Enders who completely pushed Airbus away from its original mission, and started running this as a corporation rather than a state company. He saw the potential of printing money with aircraft and misunderstood that that was his mission, which is what lead to the end of the high economic value A380 program. In short, printing money is the ECB's job, not Airbus', but the current Airbus leadership doesn't get it and are chasing higher margins.

John Leahy was to Airbus what STC is to EK.
Their mission is (was) to create movements of cash, not hoard cash. Why would you hoard cash when your boss can print it?
 
User avatar
DL747400
Posts: 983
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 5:40 pm

Of course STC is slamming everyone else for ruining EK's A380 party. After all, Airbus deciding to cut their losses and terminate the A380 program is the fault of all of the other airlines who ordered small numbers of A380s but refused to order more frames and cancelled some of their outstanding orders because they could not find a way to consistently make a profit with the A380s they already had on hand.. Shame on those other A380 operators for deciding that they could not continue to bleed $$$ any longer looking for a way to make the loser aircraft work. Shame on Airbus for terminating an aircraft program on which the company lost € Billions (not a single € in profit). Shame on Airbus for terminating the A380 program for which the largest and primary customer was a single ME airline.

Poor EK :roll:
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26566
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 6:00 pm

Waterbomber2 wrote:
I think that STC is not the mastermind behind the whole project, he just is the one who executed it.
I think that Dubai's rulers are the real masterminds.

If you read the article and followed the whole unravelling of the A380 saga, it was Airbus' leadership who ended the A380 program.

Like Air France, Airbus doesn't know what its primary purpose is anymore. Airbus' purpose was much like EK's: boosting Europe's economy by creating and maintaining high value jobs, political independence from the U.S., know-how in cutting edge technologies, production and support methods. Except that tons of high value orders have blurred their leadership's vision, as potential to make money has taken hold of managers who started misunderstanding their mission. Along came Tom Enders who completely pushed Airbus away from its original mission, and started running this as a corporation rather than a state company. He saw the potential of printing money with aircraft and misunderstood that that was his mission, which is what lead to the end of the high economic value A380 program. In short, printing money is the ECB's job, not Airbus', but the current Airbus leadership doesn't get it and are chasing higher margins.

John Leahy was to Airbus what STC is to EK.
Their mission is (was) to create movements of cash, not hoard cash. Why would you hoard cash when your boss can print it?

So, so much posturing going on.

Both STC and his boss the Emir said it was EK who cancelled their last 14 A380s, not Airbus. STC's current media campaign can't rewrite history.

If Enders took Airbus astray then the large governmental share holders could have gotten him sacked and replaced with a more acceptable candidate but of course that did not happen, in effect his bosses the share holders approved of his decision making.

One of the few positives of the A380 experience was that it taught the lesson that Airbus could not survive as a loose conglomeration of state dominated enterprises, it had to get rid of that nonsense to be viable lest German electricians continued to use their own version of CATIA to thwart French project dominance, etc.

You seem to lament the loss of an idealized version of the "old Airbus" but if such existed it is now dead and is not coming back IMO.

EK's current ongoing transformation is not as dramatic, but one could argue that it should be.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2573
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 7:37 pm

STC is just trying to divert criticism for buying $30+ B of planes that are not going to print money like they were expected to.

EK isn't just chasing slots, often they only have gotten a pair of slots with their Freedoms, Germany in particular has been stubborn in granting more to EK.

Point to Point makes EK's job more difficult. Hard to fill the seats at a break even price if the plane costs 10% more and takes 2 hours longer via the hub.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:11 pm

airlineworker wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
What works for EK works for no one else. In the end, the amount of money wasted to reinforce runways, taxiways, build special gate access, and service a plane that was built with the intention of eclipsing the 747 (something of a corporate vanity project) that cost billions and will never recoup R&D costs, could have been spent elsewhere in the aviation industry that had to adapt and prioritize for the A380. Ultimately, the A380 was undone by the twin-engine aircraft market shared by both Airbus & Boeing in the 787 and A350 models. It is EK's model that is potentially at risk. The 787/A350 and presumably future twin engine jets will eventually make DXB essentially a hub that can be bypassed.


Has it not been for EK, the A380 would have been dropped many years ago. No US carrier has them or on order and other carriers are not renewing leases. The prospects for selling or leasing used A380's is dismal. It was a failed experiment.


Exactly. But the A380's failure really has nothing to do with US carriers not taking it up. They were never really going to, anyway. The A380 is too big a plane and has all the wrong economics for a US carrier. The plane has not been a success for any airline really, except for EK and quite possibly, BA given the constraints at LHR.

The A380 was a white elephant from the get go.
 
User avatar
eurotrader85
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:45 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:03 pm

speedbird52 wrote:
IMO The A380 is way ahead of its time. But airports can only get so big, and we can only build so many new airports. Just because you will be able to fly from Portland to Manchester doesn't mean that demand for flights from Chicago to London will suddenly stop increasing. We absolutely will need VLAs in the long term. I'm betting on seeing a new VLA built in the next 20 years.

UA772IAD wrote:
Faro wrote:
Waterbomber2 wrote:
The current traffic and airspace still has enough wiggle room. By 2025, this wiggle room will be consumed and then smaller aircraft will be penalised.

:checkmark: :checkmark:
Yes, today the industry worships frequency. Commercially it has become much more important than the hard or the soft product.

One day however, perhaps by 2025 or perhaps later, this will start to change with slot and airspace restrictions coming into play in major airports.

In the very long term, VLA's may well stage a comeback.
Faro

I agree- especially if alternative modes of transport aren't viable.


Agreed. The simple question everyone has to ask, is it easier to build larger aircraft than larger airports, and then sub topic, where will people fly from and when will their hubs be full? While China is the obvious exception, in the developed world and even in developing countries such as India, Mexico etc the answer is undoubtedly that infrastructure has not kept pace with the quadrupling of global pax over the last 30 years. While LHR is the obvious candidate, being ‘full’ for the last 15 years, the slack at other hubs is also approaching this point with governments scratching their head how to get more through the gates, while pacifying NIMBYs and meet demand.

The question is the future. Is it inconceivable that as people get wealthier, especially in the rapidly growing developing world, will there be the demand for the quadrupling of numbers over the next 30 years? I think the answer is yes. Fanboys of P2P say people will stop going through hubs and O&D from smaller airports will take over. This will, and is, happening to an extent already, but it misses the point of the O&D from the mega hubs themselves. Sure eventually there might be the market for MAN – MEX directly, but what about the growing demand for a simple LHR – MEX O&D flight? A couple of 787s a day may just not cut it-demand wise.

Take out the chaff but there is an important point that Tim Clark makes which is true about LHR. BA should have ordered more (100 is nonsense), and by not doing so are simply trying to drive up yields at a slot constrained airport. Tbf to BA it's working, for having a poor product they are raking in record profits at a great yield given the little investment, but how long can that last before demand destruction with higher fares becomes second favour to adding capacity? Where is the growth at BA? This ultimately is what Tim Clark is getting at, he says his six a day into LHR are full, and while LHR is right now the obvious point, it will soon be the case at other airports.

I think its very much the case that the VLA market will come back in vogue in the coming years and while mid size planes will no doubt have a very decent and probably the largest segment of the market, VLAs will be required to carry out their niche, moving chunks of people on mass between slot constrained mammoth airports. This time round Airbus will have a better blue print to work from and work on what went wrong in the design last time, and not only misjudging the size of the VLA market. CX bemoan the lack of freight capacity, Al Baker has mentioned the heavy wings for the length of the plane, lightsaber on many threads on a.net has spoken of the better economics of stretching it further, and given Tim Clark says they could already fill 389s from LHR why not? The market will only grow and there will be space for everyone, mid size and VLA.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2252
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:10 pm

Perhaps some aviation museums will have space for a new A380 beside a used Concorde.
Does EK does need charitable contribution deductions?
 
speedbird52
Posts: 1073
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:34 pm

eurotrader85 wrote:
speedbird52 wrote:
IMO The A380 is way ahead of its time. But airports can only get so big, and we can only build so many new airports. Just because you will be able to fly from Portland to Manchester doesn't mean that demand for flights from Chicago to London will suddenly stop increasing. We absolutely will need VLAs in the long term. I'm betting on seeing a new VLA built in the next 20 years.

UA772IAD wrote:
Faro wrote:
:checkmark: :checkmark:
Yes, today the industry worships frequency. Commercially it has become much more important than the hard or the soft product.

One day however, perhaps by 2025 or perhaps later, this will start to change with slot and airspace restrictions coming into play in major airports.

In the very long term, VLA's may well stage a comeback.
Faro

I agree- especially if alternative modes of transport aren't viable.


Agreed. The simple question everyone has to ask, is it easier to build larger aircraft than larger airports, and then sub topic, where will people fly from and when will their hubs be full? While China is the obvious exception, in the developed world and even in developing countries such as India, Mexico etc the answer is undoubtedly that infrastructure has not kept pace with the quadrupling of global pax over the last 30 years. While LHR is the obvious candidate, being ‘full’ for the last 15 years, the slack at other hubs is also approaching this point with governments scratching their head how to get more through the gates, while pacifying NIMBYs and meet demand.

The question is the future. Is it inconceivable that as people get wealthier, especially in the rapidly growing developing world, will there be the demand for the quadrupling of numbers over the next 30 years? I think the answer is yes. Fanboys of P2P say people will stop going through hubs and O&D from smaller airports will take over. This will, and is, happening to an extent already, but it misses the point of the O&D from the mega hubs themselves. Sure eventually there might be the market for MAN – MEX directly, but what about the growing demand for a simple LHR – MEX O&D flight? A couple of 787s a day may just not cut it-demand wise.

Take out the chaff but there is an important point that Tim Clark makes which is true about LHR. BA should have ordered more (100 is nonsense), and by not doing so are simply trying to drive up yields at a slot constrained airport. Tbf to BA it's working, for having a poor product they are raking in record profits at a great yield given the little investment, but how long can that last before demand destruction with higher fares becomes second favour to adding capacity? Where is the growth at BA? This ultimately is what Tim Clark is getting at, he says his six a day into LHR are full, and while LHR is right now the obvious point, it will soon be the case at other airports.

I think its very much the case that the VLA market will come back in vogue in the coming years and while mid size planes will no doubt have a very decent and probably the largest segment of the market, VLAs will be required to carry out their niche, moving chunks of people on mass between slot constrained mammoth airports. This time round Airbus will have a better blue print to work from and work on what went wrong in the design last time, and not only misjudging the size of the VLA market. CX bemoan the lack of freight capacity, Al Baker has mentioned the heavy wings for the length of the plane, lightsaber on many threads on a.net has spoken of the better economics of stretching it further, and given Tim Clark says they could already fill 389s from LHR why not? The market will only grow and there will be space for everyone, mid size and VLA.

You know this morning I was thinking about the VLA conversation on here and honestly wondering if it would even be fair to call VLAs VLAs anymore when they come back. If we look across the market, with the exception of widebodies, airlines are choosing larger aircraft. C Series over CRJs, A321s over A319s. I imagine the next VLA will likely not be dramatically larger than the next step down in aircraft size
 
User avatar
eurotrader85
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:45 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:42 pm

par13del wrote:
As another poster mentioned, BA did not draw down its fleet of 747's, was it due to acquisition or operating cost, was one customer (EK) able to keep the acquisition cost so high to deter others? The bulk of the slot restricted airports with congestion and curfews are not in the USA, how are their cost structures, was the A380 penalized due to its size and weight?

They were originally planning to retire the 747s earlier this decade but then made a call on a low oil price going forwards at the time so elongated their lives, which was against the grain of others at the time. In a financial sense they won, oil prices have largely been relatively lower, allowing them to operate the birds at a reasonable cost and not have the costs associated with new investment. Of course in another sense the lack of investment has meant they have fallen behind the curve in product quality.

Sokes wrote:
BA has 135 long range widebodies. 50 are on order.
of the 135: 33 B747-400, 45 B777-200ER, 2 B777-200
So their 50 planes on order can replace the B777-200 and B777-200ER.
What about the 33 B747-400?


I love to review the BA WB order and senior Cruz’s bizarre 779 only order. I’ve said on other feeds I was surprised they didn’t go with a A/B mixed order of six to eight 380s and the rest 779s. The IAG capital Markets day presentation is interesting not in what it does say, but in what it doesn’t. The shift in the presentation this year was obviously aimed at the City bankers and IAG/BA was keen to stress that capacity growth guidance was being trimmed over the coming years, or at least to 2022... Makes sense probably to send that message in the current environment, however, it was telling that the 380s are not due to start being refurbished until 2023, with others starting ahead of this time.

The baffling point of the 779 order is where does any growth in capacity from BA come from going forwards as the 747 birds are retired? The demand destruction game of higher and higher fares on small aircraft at the capacity constrained LHR will only be able to run so long, eventually capacity will need to be added for growth. My view is we are only mid cycle into the BA WB replacement order and the gap won’t be just firming up 779 options. The Capital Markets presentation acknowledges that there is a replacement gap from 2025 onwards with the remaining 772s leaving. 2023 is an interesting point of time as believe LH are looking at 2022 to retire the six 380 birds it’s cutting from the fleet. They could be picked up by BA at knock down prices and refurbished around the same time the other 380 birds are starting their makeover. BA playing an uber long game here will no doubt allow in the meantime 380 frames to be dumped on the market and strengthening its hand as the only buyer in town when the time is right for them.
 
emiratesdriver
Posts: 294
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 9:04 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sat Nov 16, 2019 11:58 pm

This all comes back to little Timmy thinking he knew better than everyone else, it’s a mark of the mans hubris that everyone who disagreed with his “vision” was either moved aside or left for “family” reasons.
One of the true tests of a leader is being able to listen to subordinates, being able modify or adapt your plan and to learn from your mistakes, Sir M Flanagan understood this regrettably little Timmy doesn’t.
As I’ve said previously the man is an arrogant autocrat with virtually no people skills, the image you see on CNN or Bloomberg etc is a carefully cultivated persona....day to day the man is vile to be around in a work environment.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26566
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 12:43 am

eurotrader85 wrote:
Take out the chaff but there is an important point that Tim Clark makes which is true about LHR. BA should have ordered more (100 is nonsense), and by not doing so are simply trying to drive up yields at a slot constrained airport. Tbf to BA it's working, for having a poor product they are raking in record profits at a great yield given the little investment, but how long can that last before demand destruction with higher fares becomes second favour to adding capacity? Where is the growth at BA? This ultimately is what Tim Clark is getting at, he says his six a day into LHR are full, and while LHR is right now the obvious point, it will soon be the case at other airports.

Ok, BA should be using bigger planes with previous generation efficiency to free up slots for their competitors instead of using their competitive position to full advantage with regard to slots they own and running smaller planes that match demand with higher frequencies to maximize yield. Wait, what, why on earth would they do that?

eurotrader85 wrote:
The baffling point of the 779 order is where does any growth in capacity from BA come from going forwards as the 747 birds are retired? The demand destruction game of higher and higher fares on small aircraft at the capacity constrained LHR will only be able to run so long, eventually capacity will need to be added for growth. My view is we are only mid cycle into the BA WB replacement order and the gap won’t be just firming up 779 options. The Capital Markets presentation acknowledges that there is a replacement gap from 2025 onwards with the remaining 772s leaving. 2023 is an interesting point of time as believe LH are looking at 2022 to retire the six 380 birds it’s cutting from the fleet. They could be picked up by BA at knock down prices and refurbished around the same time the other 380 birds are starting their makeover. BA playing an uber long game here will no doubt allow in the meantime 380 frames to be dumped on the market and strengthening its hand as the only buyer in town when the time is right for them.

Yes, and in 2023 the A380 supply chain will be largely shut down, new interiors will still cost EUR 30M or so, Trent 900s will still be without anything akin to a PIP, etc. I guess BA is OK with trailing edge technology. BA's situation parallels QF in terms of slot constraint and curfew, yet Alan Joyce said he'd have to be very drunk to buy more A380s. I wonder if Senior Cruz likes Sangria?
 
musman9853
Posts: 964
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:54 am

emiratesdriver wrote:
This all comes back to little Timmy thinking he knew better than everyone else, it’s a mark of the mans hubris that everyone who disagreed with his “vision” was either moved aside or left for “family” reasons.
One of the true tests of a leader is being able to listen to subordinates, being able modify or adapt your plan and to learn from your mistakes, Sir M Flanagan understood this regrettably little Timmy doesn’t.
As I’ve said previously the man is an arrogant autocrat with virtually no people skills, the image you see on CNN or Bloomberg etc is a carefully cultivated persona....day to day the man is vile to be around in a work environment.

Sorry if this is too personal, but are you still flying for ek?
 
ScottB
Posts: 7510
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 5:06 am

Sokes wrote:
Isn't it normal that early models get retired fast to satisfy the most pressing spare parts need?


No. That is absurd. The very first 747-400 flew for nearly 26 years. The first non-ER 77-200s delivered to UA in 1995 are still active.

Where is the logic in purchasing an expensive new airframe to do the job of a middle-aged example of the same model? The newer one will be slightly more reliable but the capital cost is much, much higher.

eurotrader85 wrote:
The baffling point of the 779 order is where does any growth in capacity from BA come from going forwards as the 747 birds are retired? The demand destruction game of higher and higher fares on small aircraft at the capacity constrained LHR will only be able to run so long, eventually capacity will need to be added for growth.


Only in A380-denial-land does a 777-9 count as a "small aircraft" when compared to a 747-400. The 777-9 will provide almost as many seats at much lower unit costs. And BA, as the largest slotholder at LHR, has less urgent need for VLAs than some would think, precisely because their business model is different from EK's. They don't want to connect vast numbers of people across a wayport hub at LHR. BA's bread and butter is the lucrative O&D traffic to the preferred airport for one of the world's most important travel markets -- London. Connecting passengers are gravy. They're also willing to spill a fair amount of peak season traffic to other carriers rather than fly thousands of empty seats a day across the Atlantic in the low season.

A380 is not the only effective way for BA to push more passengers through LHR. They can upgauge A319/20/21 to 787, 787 to 77E or A350, 77E or A350 to 77W or 779.

WPvsMW wrote:
Does EK does need charitable contribution deductions?


They don't pay taxes so likely not. But a museum piece EK A380 might make a nice future tourist attraction for Dubai, Inc.

eurotrader85 wrote:
The question is the future. Is it inconceivable that as people get wealthier, especially in the rapidly growing developing world, will there be the demand for the quadrupling of numbers over the next 30 years? I think the answer is yes.


I'm not convinced this is true, given the increasing amount of vitriol directed at the use of fossil fuels in the air transportation sector. Extremely high carbon taxes might well lead to a long-term decline in the demand for air travel.

Cointrin330 wrote:
the A380's failure really has nothing to do with US carriers not taking it up. They were never really going to, anyway.


And the U.S. carriers said this to Airbus any number of times. Before launch and every time Airbus's sales force brought their dog-and-pony show to the HQs of the U.S. carriers. That's not to say there are no routes which would be viable for the U.S.-based international carriers; rather, there aren't enough with consistent enough demand to justify a subfleet of A380s.
 
VV
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 6:38 am

emiratesdriver wrote:
This all comes back to little Timmy thinking he knew better than everyone else, it’s a mark of the mans hubris that everyone who disagreed with his “vision” was either moved aside or left for “family” reasons.
One of the true tests of a leader is being able to listen to subordinates, being able modify or adapt your plan and to learn from your mistakes, Sir M Flanagan understood this regrettably little Timmy doesn’t.
As I’ve said previously the man is an arrogant autocrat with virtually no people skills, the image you see on CNN or Bloomberg etc is a carefully cultivated persona....day to day the man is vile to be around in a work environment.


There is always a reason for something.

What is his reason to order so many 777-300ER and A380?
 
94717
Posts: 2789
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Emirates Chairman slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 10:06 am

I always got the impression that the EK and ME3 started to consider themself as gods and more inportant then other for example European carriers. All new airplanes and new versions like 779 not adjusted with ME3 special directedcto their needs was not good enough.

Airbus started to listen to the other carriers and ME3 got pissed cancelling many A350s and in some cases walking away from Airbus in even the shows before canceling.

Somewhere Airbus managment took decision that orders from sole ME3 for a type was dangerous and too high risk.

Now EK complains. This is bussiness.
 
User avatar
eurotrader85
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:45 pm

Re: Emirates Chairman slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 11:04 am

Revelation wrote:
eurotrader85 wrote:
Take out the chaff but there is an important point that Tim Clark makes which is true about LHR. BA should have ordered more (100 is nonsense), and by not doing so are simply trying to drive up yields at a slot constrained airport. Tbf to BA it's working, for having a poor product they are raking in record profits at a great yield given the little investment, but how long can that last before demand destruction with higher fares becomes second favour to adding capacity? Where is the growth at BA? This ultimately is what Tim Clark is getting at, he says his six a day into LHR are full, and while LHR is right now the obvious point, it will soon be the case at other airports.

Ok, BA should be using bigger planes with previous generation efficiency to free up slots for their competitors instead of using their competitive position to full advantage with regard to slots they own and running smaller planes that match demand with higher frequencies to maximize yield. Wait, what, why on earth would they do that?


Who said to free up slots for competitors? We’re talking about up-gauging routes here at an airport which has been full for 15 years in a global environment of continuous greater demand. There is only so far getting people to shun out more and more money for a seat as restricted supply drives up prices will work before demand destruction takes place and people look elsewhere to the numerous other airlines who have up-gauged to LHR from their hubs. It is telling that LHRs share of transit traffic has been in decline compared to its other European peers.

Revelation wrote:
eurotrader85 wrote:
The baffling point of the 779 order is where does any growth in capacity from BA come from going forwards as the 747 birds are retired? The demand destruction game of higher and higher fares on small aircraft at the capacity constrained LHR will only be able to run so long, eventually capacity will need to be added for growth. My view is we are only mid cycle into the BA WB replacement order and the gap won’t be just firming up 779 options. The Capital Markets presentation acknowledges that there is a replacement gap from 2025 onwards with the remaining 772s leaving. 2023 is an interesting point of time as believe LH are looking at 2022 to retire the six 380 birds it’s cutting from the fleet. They could be picked up by BA at knock down prices and refurbished around the same time the other 380 birds are starting their makeover. BA playing an uber long game here will no doubt allow in the meantime 380 frames to be dumped on the market and strengthening its hand as the only buyer in town when the time is right for them.

Yes, and in 2023 the A380 supply chain will be largely shut down, new interiors will still cost EUR 30M or so, Trent 900s will still be without anything akin to a PIP, etc. I guess BA is OK with trailing edge technology. BA's situation parallels QF in terms of slot constraint and curfew, yet Alan Joyce said he'd have to be very drunk to buy more A380s. I wonder if Senior Cruz likes Sangria?

I don’t think it is remotely possible to compare LHR to SYD. Two very different operations and capabilities. LHR has been full for over 15 years and the only growth comes from upgauging and airlines buying up the slots from those who cannot. Senior Cruz will hopefully be gone soon enough and then WW can haggle away and hopefully someone will improve the product.

The only point that goes against more 380s for BA is the third runway at LHR. When, and if, it will happen, and if yes how much of the extra slots will BA be allowed. The IAG capital markets day presentation is telling that they have left 2025 onwards a bit wait and see for more WB orders. My view is if they know they will get a chunk of the slots and the runway is operational by 2026 as ‘planned’, then 779s options will be firmed and more 350s etc as extra available frequency can build out the pax which would make disciplined sense. But if it again gets stalled or the can is again thrown down the line then BA really need to do something a bit smarter to grow their operations, other than trying to charge more for a seat on one of their planes, which entails 380s.

ScottB wrote:
eurotrader85 wrote:
The baffling point of the 779 order is where does any growth in capacity from BA come from going forwards as the 747 birds are retired? The demand destruction game of higher and higher fares on small aircraft at the capacity constrained LHR will only be able to run so long, eventually capacity will need to be added for growth.


Only in A380-denial-land does a 777-9 count as a "small aircraft" when compared to a 747-400. The 777-9 will provide almost as many seats at much lower unit costs. And BA, as the largest slotholder at LHR, has less urgent need for VLAs than some would think, precisely because their business model is different from EK's. They don't want to connect vast numbers of people across a wayport hub at LHR. BA's bread and butter is the lucrative O&D traffic to the preferred airport for one of the world's most important travel markets -- London. Connecting passengers are gravy. They're also willing to spill a fair amount of peak season traffic to other carriers rather than fly thousands of empty seats a day across the Atlantic in the low season.

A380 is not the only effective way for BA to push more passengers through LHR. They can upgauge A319/20/21 to 787, 787 to 77E or A350, 77E or A350 to 77W or 779.


Those 744s have been in the fleet since the early 90s, when LHR was a fraction of the traffic it is today. “will provide almost as many seats at much lower unit costs” completely sums it up. It is not growth. Where is the growth from BA coming from in a world of increasing demand? Why wouldn’t they want to connect vast numbers of people across their hub? They are physically doing it and to a large extent focussing on connecting people to and from the US, as geographically it’s a better battle ground than trying to connect central Europeans to go back on themselves to connect to Asia against their peers, hence all the secondary US cities popping up. Good strategy, do more. If the demand is there and you can move them profitably then why not?

You can even break this down to premium passengers if you like. There is no doubt more J pax now then there was a decade ago to and from London. So why would you replace old aircraft with an aircraft that is going to restrict that supply further and pass the pax to your competitors? The short-term view is you charge more for a seat on one of your planes, greater yield per seat etc. But ultimately you can only go so far, and when investors look for where the future top line growth will come from, flying more profitable pax makes more money.

LHR, as it stands, is EXACTLY the type of airport for VLAs. Where Sir Tim is losing the plot is saying that BA should have had a 100 in the fleet, which is beyond crazy, and in any case LHR and DXB are very different operations, and goes further into the miscalculation by Airbus of what the size of the VLA market was going to be and look like. We’re talking here of adding half a dozen or so to complement the WB fleet. I have no doubt that they could be digested into the fleet profitably and give it some area of growth instead of almost replacing like for like, which is only passing the baton of pax to its competitors in the growing market. We are talking about disciplined growth.

It is true that upgauging across the rest of the fleet is happening, 319s being phased out and 321s replacing them etc etc. That is positive, but in the most slot restricted airport in the world, that only eeks out more passengers every year as airlines continuously upgauge and force out those who can’t, the largest player could profitably take more 380s into the fleet. The only scenario that goes against this is the 3rd runway being built as mentioned above.
Last edited by eurotrader85 on Sun Nov 17, 2019 11:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
cv990Coronado
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:38 pm

Re: Emirates Chairman slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 11:10 am

olle wrote:
I always got the impression that the EK and ME3 started to consider themself as gods and more inportant then other for example European carriers. All new airplanes and new versions like 779 not adjusted with ME3 special directedcto their needs was not good enough.

Airbus started to listen to the other carriers and ME3 got pissed cancelling many A350s and in some cases walking away from Airbus in even the shows before canceling.

Somewhere Airbus managment took decision that orders from sole ME3 for a type was dangerous and too high risk.

Now EK complains. This is bussiness.


So true, perhaps with hindsight Boeing could have made a perfectly good, but less ambitious upgrade to the 77W. Now they wouldn't be worrying about their ME heavy 777X order book at bargain prices and would have and funds available for an NSA and/or NMA.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 9100
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Emirates Chairman slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:10 pm

cv990Coronado wrote:
olle wrote:
I always got the impression that the EK and ME3 started to consider themself as gods and more inportant then other for example European carriers. All new airplanes and new versions like 779 not adjusted with ME3 special directedcto their needs was not good enough.

Airbus started to listen to the other carriers and ME3 got pissed cancelling many A350s and in some cases walking away from Airbus in even the shows before canceling.

Somewhere Airbus managment took decision that orders from sole ME3 for a type was dangerous and too high risk.

Now EK complains. This is bussiness.


So true, perhaps with hindsight Boeing could have made a perfectly good, but less ambitious upgrade to the 77W. Now they wouldn't be worrying about their ME heavy 777X order book at bargain prices and would have and funds available for an NSA and/or NMA.


Money is already spent on a niche plane that is not going to sell in bulk to either ME3 or others. Washington state incentives won't kick-in without mass production. Add MAX loss and settlements. There will be no money for NSA and/or NMA.
 
morrisond
Posts: 3497
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Emirates Chairman slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:24 pm

There is one thing that the A380 could possibly be great for and that is converting the Upper Deck to Liquid Hydrogen storage.

That would really change the game. For the same Energy Density Liquid Hydrogen is only 1/3 the weight of Jet Fuel. It would take care of Carbon emissions issues.

It would need a new wing for sure as you can't really store Hydrogen in it - but then it could be made really thin and efficient - the TOW would be so much lower so you could probably do it as a twin. The GE9x seems to have a lot of potential to go to thrusts a lot higher as it was tested to 135K.

Stretch it to 85M as envisioned originally and go 11W to get great seating on the main level.

From Wiki

Liquid hydrogen has about four times the volume for the same amount of energy of kerosene based jet-fuel. In addition, its highly volatile nature precludes storing the fuel in the wings, as with conventional transport aircraft. Therefore, most liquid hydrogen aircraft designs store the fuel in the fuselage, leading to a larger fuselage length and diameter than a conventional kerosene fuelled aircraft. This lowers the performance due to the extra wetted area of the fuselage. The larger fuselage size causes more skin friction drag and wave drag. On the other hand, hydrogen is about one-third of the weight of kerosene jet-fuel for the same amount of energy. This means that for the same range and performance (ignoring the effect of volume), the hydrogen aircraft would have about one-third of the fuel weight. For a Boeing 747-400 type aircraft, this would reduce the takeoff gross weight from 360,000 to 270,000 kg (800,000 to 600,000 lb). Thus, the performance of a hydrogen-fueled aircraft is a trade-off of the larger wetted area and lower fuel weight. This trade-off depends essentially on the size of the aircraft.
 
VV
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Emirates Chairman slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:26 pm

I think we all know that the last A380 will get delivered in 2021 and Boeing already delivered the last 747-8 Intercontinental back in December 2017.

So stop trying to justify that A380 could have been a success or could potentially be a success in the future. It's dead and we need to accept it.

And yes, a hell lot of people were absolutely wrong about this market and others, a minority, have always been right.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10931
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Emirates CEO slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 2:02 pm

ScottB wrote:
Sokes wrote:
And BA, as the largest slotholder at LHR, has less urgent need for VLAs than some would think, precisely because their business model is different from EK's. They don't want to connect vast numbers of people across a wayport hub at LHR. BA's bread and butter is the lucrative O&D traffic to the preferred airport for one of the world's most important travel markets -- London. Connecting passengers are gravy.

This does however challenge the general thoughts about LHR when folks say that the reason why other London airports do not do well on O&D is because they lack the connections that LHR offers.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26566
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Emirates Chairman slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 3:03 pm

eurotrader85 wrote:
Who said to free up slots for competitors? We’re talking about up-gauging routes here at an airport which has been full for 15 years in a global environment of continuous greater demand. There is only so far getting people to shun out more and more money for a seat as restricted supply drives up prices will work before demand destruction takes place and people look elsewhere to the numerous other airlines who have up-gauged to LHR from their hubs. It is telling that LHRs share of transit traffic has been in decline compared to its other European peers.

You are correct in asserting if BA constricts supply too much they risk losing business to other hubs but also if they expand supply too much they drop yields.

I think your mistake is projecting that you know the situation better than BA does and that BA should be expanding supply rather than holding steady or reducing.

As you may note BA hasn't made a lot of money over that 15 year span you mention except for the last few years where they have been able to match supply and demand by having a fleet with many different size and range options and by carefully picking the routes they serve and the products they offer.

That same fleet flexibility will allow selective up gauges as ScottB mentioned, rather than just putting A380/77W on every route as EK has done and is now causing EK so much trouble.

Also as ScottB says above transit travel is low yield especially for BA given their relatively high cost being based in London, so they're not going to fight for that traffic.

You may recall WW did a market survey of used A380s a year or two ago and ended up buying nothing and the only conclusion one can reach is that adding used A380s just did not pencil out.

I think the a big lesson of the A380 saga is that you should NOT get too far out ahead of the supply/demand curve because guessing wrong is very costly.

Full planes serve to drive yield up since pax pay more to get on to the plane and empty seats not only make no money but also drive yield down.

The market is a lot more elastic than many seem to think, and VLAs are the least flexible aircraft out there.

It seems that many here think that Airbus and airlines such as BA have a responsibility to be ahead of the supply/demand curve, and they do not.

EK is a prime example of what happens when you do get ahead of the supply/demand curve: you end up with a costly restructuring exercise to right size your fleet.

And Airbus is paying the price by having a clean sheet airplane end production a dozen or so years after first EIS with massive losses along the way.

We shall see if 77X has the same fate, it is only two Y rows bigger than 77W but the market is clearly favoring 789/A359 sized aircraft these days.
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1469
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Emirates Chairman slams other airlines and Airbus for mishandling and retiring A380

Sun Nov 17, 2019 3:13 pm

VV wrote:
I think we all know that the last A380 will get delivered in 2021 and Boeing already delivered the last 747-8 Intercontinental back in December 2017.

So stop trying to justify that A380 could have been a success or could potentially be a success in the future. It's dead and we need to accept it.

And yes, a hell lot of people were absolutely wrong about this market and others, a minority, have always been right.


You are right to say that they wrong about THIS market, but will they be wrong about the 2030 market? If you consider the fact that there are B744's from the early 1990's flying around, the market for A380 delivered today would extend all the way towards the 2040's.
I think that a time will come where they will be right.

Revelation wrote:
Waterbomber2 wrote:
However, the A380 was not the wrong choice for their little oasis project. The A380 helped put Dubai on the map. There is no way that they would have achieved their current status with a bunch of A330's and B77W's.
Tim's mission was not to build a profitable airline, but to build a sustainable airline as a motor for a self-sustaining economy.
Not every airline needs to be profitable or even self-sustaining to make sense.
The same reason why cities worldwide build and spend big on subways and public transportation, the Italian government keeps AZ alive, JAL was baiked out by the Japanese governmenta
, and the Dubai Government invests in EK. EK is Dubai's tentacles, with passengers worldwide giving their currencies to get its services.
EK is Dubai's subway in the skies, one that can get you from JFK to DEL, or from TYO to GRU.
The A380 ia just a tool that unifies 3 factors for EK:
1. Marketing factor. Ie, my subway rolling stock is more comfortable. The Wow effect.
2. Cost factor: the A380 has very low unit cost that allows them to offer value. Ie more personal space for the same price. Relates to the marketing factor.
In addition, the A380 gives them operational mass, in terms of RPK, one of the largest airlines in the world. Mass means lower costs per unit as more units share costs.
3. Slot factor. The A380 allows to make most of limitations in terms of slots and traffic rights.

The question to ask isn't if the A380 was not the wrong choice for their little oasis project, but was 142 A380s the wrong choice for their little oasis project.

The answer is indisputably no because STC has already cancelled the last 14 A380s that were on order, not to mention the putative 20+18 MOU that never got converted to orders.

C'mon, admit it, there was a much earlier point where STC should have read the writing on the wall and reversed course, but now he is stuck with the last A380s off the line that will be a fiscal bloodbath for EK now and the next dozen plus years, just at the time where their competitors have gone to long range point to point 789/A339/A359 service and are eating his lunch.

The fact that he doubles down on his mistake in the press shows what leadership he is providing.

Waterbomber2 wrote:
At AF for instance, they don't know what they are anymore. They are not a government airline, they are not offering value to any of their shareholders. When you don't have a purpose it's not the A380 that doesn't make sense, it's every aircraft that doesn't make sense. Do you think that the B787, A350 and A321 will "make AF great again?"
Copy from AF and paste to LH and BA.
LH Passage is barely profitable, BA is only milking investments from the past, and I'm talking about the less than 50 now remaining VLA's that give them mass and profits.

LOL, BA has just announced record profits, AF sees the moves they make and tries to emulate them. AF's biggest problem is workforce productivity not fleet management. Tagging BA, LH and AF as governmental airlines is nothing more than a crude attempt at distraction.

Waterbomber2 wrote:
Delta Airlines, 6 billion USD profits annually.
Why? One answer: mass. Atalanta.
Take Atalanta away, and Delta becomes AA.
DL would probably be making more money with a fleet of 30 A380's.

DL is mastering the art of matching their fleet to their route network, and buy doing opportunistic aircraft purchases instead of prestige aircraft purchases. STC spends big bucks by making big splashes by buying at top of market. DL eats his lunch by buying when great opportunities present themselves and using in house MRO to prolong fleet life so they can time the new purchases based on opportunistically minimizing capital expenditure.

Besides, you are now supporting the idea that STC should have followed the "investment in infrastructure (appreciating asset) over aircraft (depreciating asset) is always better" maxim so he could have a DWC airport that looks more like ATL rather than being stuck in DXB which looks more like LHR.,

STC picked the style over substance approach by ordering 142 A380s with MOUs taking him to 180 before reality kicked him right in the crotch and forced him to make necessary and now quite late changes.

Now he's stuck with too many whales and not enough beach to land them whilst his competitors fly all around him making the kind of money he hopes to be able to make after a huge transition in his fleet spanning several years to reflect the same approach his competitors have already implemented.

In short, he over shot the mark and is now behind the curve desperately playing catch-up while using bravado as a distraction to mask his mistakes.

It's kind of hard to suggest that all of this will end will for STC and EK.


Ok many points, many good points, many points saying correct things but with the wrong conclusion.

Let's talk about BA.
2 billion GBP profits, not bad is it?
So the right question to ask is, would their profits have been lower or higher if they had 50 A380's instead of 12?

Talking about infrastructure as appreciable assets and aircraft as depreciable assets.
On JFK-LHR, BA chose to replace the B744's by the most expensive aircraft on the market, ie the B777X, rather than making the tough decisions about investing in proper A380 infrastructure at JFK. Arguably, the choice was for depreciable rather than appreciable assets.

The problem arises when you guys see a fleet purchase decision as something about the present rather than something that sets the course for a quarter century or longer.
Did you think that LH thought its B748i purchase through? How about their back pedaling on the B779?
Or ordering obsolete end of line B77W's for LX? One after one questionnable decisions.
Last edited by Waterbomber2 on Sun Nov 17, 2019 3:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A330Inter, AM764, Baidu [Spider], BC77008, DartHerald, doug, dstc47, Emile, f4f3a, Flyingsottsman, Google Adsense [Bot], JAmie2k9, mict, MileHFL400, mrsmiley2345, N383SW, NZ777ER, O23, olba, palA35X, panamair, Pendennis, SEU, Smoketrails, Someone83, tayser, TEALflyer, trefor, ZK-NBT and 236 guests

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