Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
 
User avatar
calstanford
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:16 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Fri May 22, 2020 5:49 pm

I could never have said it better than lightsaber.

Only thing I would add is the numerous failed attempts of Abu Dhabi money to buy market share by buying into failing airlines, from Air Seychelles to Allitalia to connect through Abu Dhabi with Etihad. That cost billions and these years long distractions led to lack of focus.
 
Exeiowa
Posts: 357
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:49 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Fri May 22, 2020 7:37 pm

What we see here is political reality meeting economic reality, we will see which one wins in the end.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20938
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sat May 23, 2020 2:29 am

Etihad's bond holders are demanding a debt restructuring:

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN22X1CS

Oh boy, the fallout of the Etihad equity Alliance hasn't finished.

I personally think it is time to simplify the fleet to one widebody type and sell off the 777, A350, and A380. Possibly keep the 777F, but that is it. 787 and A320.

Lightsaber
I cannot wait to get vaccinated to live again! Warning: I simulated that it takes 50%+ vaccinated to protect the vaccinated and 75%+ vaccinated to protect the vac-hesitant.
 
oldJoe
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:04 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sat May 23, 2020 2:46 am

lightsaber wrote:
Etihad's bond holders are demanding a debt restructuring:

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN22X1CS

Oh boy, the fallout of the Etihad equity Alliance hasn't finished.

I personally think it is time to simplify the fleet to one widebody type and sell off the 777, A350, and A380. Possibly keep the 777F, but that is it. 787 and A320.

Lightsaber

They have to shrink and therefore I have to agree : 32x series and 787`s and that`s it. I also think that they have still to many aircraft on order
 
Arion640
Posts: 3162
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sat May 23, 2020 5:32 pm

VSMUT wrote:
calstanford wrote:
What’s the reason for Etihad’s existance? Abu Dhabi is small and could very well be served by literally anyone else in the region.


Etihad serves the same role to Abu Dhabi as Emirates does for Dubai, to assist in growing the city and economy by attracting business, expats and tourists. I agree that they are a poorly run basket case, but without a dedicated airline, Abu Dhabi would likely have been relegated to a secondary city on the outskirts of Dubai. Contrary to the name, they aren't as United as they probably should be in this case.

Had they been more cooperative, a HSR line from DXB to Abu Dhabi center could have whisked travellers there in some 35 minutes, 25 minutes from Al Makhtoum.


I agree. Abu Dhabi even though it’s the capital, it would be like Ras Al Kaimah, just an extra tourist resort on the outskirts of Dubai.
 
myki
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 6:43 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sat May 23, 2020 7:59 pm

The "United" part comes from when it is a coincidence that each emirate (probably what would be called a 'state' in some other countries) happen to agree on the same thing. Not but agreeing together. Just by coincidence.

This is why there are a few airlines with so many destinations within a small distance - you could leave AUH, go via DWC and DXB and get to SHJ in, perhaps, rounding up to maybe 2.5hrs / 3hrs. Etihad. flydubai. Emirates. Air Arabia. Are that many needed? I guess we will find out soon enough on who has the deepest pockets and who is too proud to shut up shop.
 
Breathe
Posts: 725
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:06 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sat May 23, 2020 8:50 pm

myki wrote:
The "United" part comes from when it is a coincidence that each emirate (probably what would be called a 'state' in some other countries) happen to agree on the same thing. Not but agreeing together. Just by coincidence.

This is why there are a few airlines with so many destinations within a small distance - you could leave AUH, go via DWC and DXB and get to SHJ in, perhaps, rounding up to maybe 2.5hrs / 3hrs. Etihad. flydubai. Emirates. Air Arabia. Are that many needed? I guess we will find out soon enough on who has the deepest pockets and who is too proud to shut up shop.

That would be all of them! :D
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1398
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sun May 24, 2020 2:23 am

myki wrote:
This is why there are a few airlines with so many destinations within a small distance - you could leave AUH, go via DWC and DXB and get to SHJ in, perhaps, rounding up to maybe 2.5hrs / 3hrs. Etihad. flydubai. Emirates. Air Arabia. Are that many needed? I guess we will find out soon enough on who has the deepest pockets and who is too proud to shut up shop.

The UAE is similar to London in a sense - London has LHR, LGW, STN, and LTN airports.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20938
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sun May 24, 2020 2:53 am

flee wrote:
myki wrote:
This is why there are a few airlines with so many destinations within a small distance - you could leave AUH, go via DWC and DXB and get to SHJ in, perhaps, rounding up to maybe 2.5hrs / 3hrs. Etihad. flydubai. Emirates. Air Arabia. Are that many needed? I guess we will find out soon enough on who has the deepest pockets and who is too proud to shut up shop.

The UAE is similar to London in a sense - London has LHR, LGW, STN, and LTN airports.

London is the #1 O&D market for air travel in the world (when the world is normal...). LHR is about 30% connecting traffic and the others rather little connecting traffic (nearly all O&D).

Getting good statistics on DXB's O&D traffic is a challenge, but it is believed to be about 30% 0&D (70% connecting). More for the small amount of traffic at DWC.
EY and QR have even higher fractions connecting traffic (which is lower yield than O&D, usually).

Comparing to London, New York, Beijing, or Tokyo is very difficult due to the immense O&D (local, not connecting) traffic. Those markets are in demand due to their huge local economies/populations.

When we restart, every connecting airline will compete harshly for connecting traffic. There is no natural barrier to connecting traffic.

EY must compete with:
EK/FZ
QR
TK
Air Arabia
Turkish

and for many of their markets, the EU3 (LH group, IAG, and AF/KL).

Only Dubai has significant O&D traffic, but even then, it is a low amount of O&D traffic compared to LHR/LGW/STN/LTN/LCY.
As to needed, both QR and EY have been run as political rather than economic entities. Neither has made good money in the past. Only Emirates group (EK/FlyDubai) publishes an audited annual report.

EY had "investment" from oil profits, which are not being made in today's oil market. As I type this, oil is way up to $33.56 for WTI:
https://markets.businessinsider.com/com ... e?type=wti

Abu Dhabi needs $65 per bbl to meet their normal obligations.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/neiledward ... 8ff983d164

Unfortunately, there isn't the money to "invest" in EY today.
QR isn't doing much better on energy revenue: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... arket-woes

So the market is going to be on which airline can recover fastest. In my opinion, EK is the numbers run company. Oh, I think DL, LH, and 6E are even more numbers run; efficiency is relative, EK just needs to put enough of the competition at a disadvantage. Since EY wasn't doing well financially before, they'll do even worse now.

I believe the only hope for EY is to shrink quickly. That means parking the A380s (probably permanently, but it would be worth keeping them serviceable for a little while), They must simplify.

As I proposed before, shrink to purely the A32x (NEO and CEO) and the 787 (in other words, ditch the 777 and A380 and continue to store the A350s, until they can be sold). Keep the 777Fs for now (I assume they are profitable in this environment).

Lightsaber
I cannot wait to get vaccinated to live again! Warning: I simulated that it takes 50%+ vaccinated to protect the vaccinated and 75%+ vaccinated to protect the vac-hesitant.
 
User avatar
Antaras
Posts: 1149
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 6:18 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sun May 24, 2020 5:26 am

mxaxai wrote:
Jefford717 wrote:
Any idea what’s going to happen to the 5 A350-1000 that are already built but never put to service?

Maybe scrap for spare parts? Store indefinitely in a nice dry place? Not many other customers for the -1000.

Not really. Some carriers may need the A35K buy didn't order yet.
VN for example.
If you disagree with my statement, assume that it was just a joke :duck:
 
Antarius
Posts: 2971
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sun May 24, 2020 5:28 am

flee wrote:
myki wrote:
This is why there are a few airlines with so many destinations within a small distance - you could leave AUH, go via DWC and DXB and get to SHJ in, perhaps, rounding up to maybe 2.5hrs / 3hrs. Etihad. flydubai. Emirates. Air Arabia. Are that many needed? I guess we will find out soon enough on who has the deepest pockets and who is too proud to shut up shop.

The UAE is similar to London in a sense - London has LHR, LGW, STN, and LTN airports.


Very different. All those airports serve traffic going to London and the UK. There is some connections, of course, but they exist to serve the London area. Between the size of London and the fact that all 6 airports combined have the same number of runways as DFW, they coexist without cannibalizing each other.

All the UAE airports are competing. In addition IST, DOH etc. Are in competition too.
Militant Centrist
Let's all just use some common sense
 
oschkosch
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sun May 24, 2020 6:27 am

lightsaber wrote:
Getting good statistics on DXB's O&D traffic is a challenge, but it is believed to be about 30% 0&D (70% connecting).



Ok, these are not any statistics but just a personal impression. I have flown on EK very often, mostly connecting at DXB to Asia but I have also just flown to Dubai itself.. Each and every time, the amount of bags coming out at the luggage belts in DXB has been very low, passport control always empty. I would say it was always 80% or more connecting on the flights I was on. You can also see it quite well at the point within DXB airport where connecting passengers go onward towards transit security and passengers going to passport control are separated. Hardly anybody goes to passport control/gets off at DXB.

Again, just my personal experience.
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2373
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Sun May 24, 2020 7:58 am

lightsaber wrote:
flee wrote:
myki wrote:
This is why there are a few airlines with so many destinations within a small distance - you could leave AUH, go via DWC and DXB and get to SHJ in, perhaps, rounding up to maybe 2.5hrs / 3hrs. Etihad. flydubai. Emirates. Air Arabia. Are that many needed? I guess we will find out soon enough on who has the deepest pockets and who is too proud to shut up shop.

The UAE is similar to London in a sense - London has LHR, LGW, STN, and LTN airports.

London is the #1 O&D market for air travel in the world (when the world is normal...). LHR is about 30% connecting traffic and the others rather little connecting traffic (nearly all O&D).

EY must compete with:
EK/FZ
QR
Air Arabia
Turkish

and for many of their markets, the EU3 (LH group, IAG, and AF/KL).

Lightsaber

What looks like a hub to some, in today's point to point world. LGW must have over 150 destinations served, EasyJet had 100 basically all O & D, no connections, no banks of flights, etc. Stansted basically same story, different names. Luton and MAN quite similar too. In the US, SEA with Alaska is quite similar, but with more connecting, in particular in/out of Alaska. Alaska is only 3/4 million with a lot of airports so SEA is their hub to everywhere. But for us in Seattle its a 100 plus direct destinations.

I highlighted TK because with the new airport it is a nearby hub to the ME3, but it will have extensive O&D traffic. 15 years ago a lot of Turkish traffic flew to a ME3 hub to continue on, now lots of directs.

The ME3 are all facing the problem of being a hub when more and more of the spokes can just go direct. Covid may change this for a while as lower volumes mean less flights filling the smallest viable plane for the route, basically putting the 737 flight into a loss position. This will revert traffic back into the hub model until traffic is above 60% of the pre CV.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 3238
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Wed May 27, 2020 6:56 am

 
User avatar
FrenchPotatoEye
Posts: 435
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2017 1:20 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Wed May 27, 2020 7:33 am

Ishrion wrote:


No airlines going to validating speculations are they???!!
 
TC957
Posts: 3929
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Wed May 27, 2020 7:43 am

Ishrion wrote:

Great news if true, let's hope for official positive news.
 
planecane
Posts: 1597
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Wed May 27, 2020 11:08 am

[url][/url]
DLHAM wrote:
Maybe Delta has some use for these A350-1000s? Corona isnt forever and the -1000s maybe bring the extra performance needed for the longest 777 flights.

While the current pandemic won't last forever I think it has been a wake up call to the airlines about how international travel can disappear overnight. I think they will try to minimize the number of the most expensive aircraft in their fleets. While a 787-9 might not have the revenue potential of an A350-1000 or 777X in good times, it is a far lower financial risk for catastrophic times.

Also, a 787-9 redeployed to medium haul domestic service won't lose nearly as much money as doing the same with a 777X.

Any future outbreak that is like SARS or MERS is going to have immediate international travel bans until it is clear that it is under control. Those outbreaks happen relatively frequently. COVID-19 has changed the international travel business model forever.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8781
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Wed May 27, 2020 1:50 pm

planecane wrote:
Any future outbreak that is like SARS or MERS is going to have immediate international travel bans until it is clear that it is under control. Those outbreaks happen relatively frequently. COVID-19 has changed the international travel business model forever.


Not necessarily. The utility of a travel ban, weighed against the costs of a ban, will in part be a function of the readiness of disease spread, and its lethality. Observe that China/Hong Kong-USA travel continued right through SARS and MERS. The modern world has continued travel in spite of many contagious diseases, including smallpox and tuberculosis. I'm hoping governments take cues from epidemiologists, not Chicken Littles.
 
planecane
Posts: 1597
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 2:44 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
planecane wrote:
Any future outbreak that is like SARS or MERS is going to have immediate international travel bans until it is clear that it is under control. Those outbreaks happen relatively frequently. COVID-19 has changed the international travel business model forever.


Not necessarily. The utility of a travel ban, weighed against the costs of a ban, will in part be a function of the readiness of disease spread, and its lethality. Observe that China/Hong Kong-USA travel continued right through SARS and MERS. The modern world has continued travel in spite of many contagious diseases, including smallpox and tuberculosis. I'm hoping governments take cues from epidemiologists, not Chicken Littles.

The problem is that the epidemiologists can also be the chicken littles. With this pandemic in the collective memory, chicken little will have a lot of power at least for a decade or so.
 
thaiflyer
Posts: 349
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 6:55 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 6:20 am

9Patch wrote:
filipinoavgeek wrote:
So if Etihad does ground their A380s permanently, that's the end of the Residences right? We'll likely never see anything like it in a commercial aircraft ever again? Plus with even Emirates reportedly already considering retiring at least some of their A380s, it makes me wonder if inflight showers have any future in commercial aviation. If anything, I'm surprised that neither of them have installed showers on their 777s yet.


How popular were inflight showers?
I assume they were limited to passengers who booked first class suites.
Did you have to wear a seat belt while showering?
I'd hate to be all soaped up and slippery when you hit turbulence.


From what i can see the shower are very popular. ( i only can speak for Emirates )
I'm using them on almost every trip i make with the 380.
There is a bench in the shower which you can use when the seat belt light comes on.
And yes it's only for first class.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 11060
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 10:55 am

planecane wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
planecane wrote:
Any future outbreak that is like SARS or MERS is going to have immediate international travel bans until it is clear that it is under control. Those outbreaks happen relatively frequently. COVID-19 has changed the international travel business model forever.


Not necessarily. The utility of a travel ban, weighed against the costs of a ban, will in part be a function of the readiness of disease spread, and its lethality. Observe that China/Hong Kong-USA travel continued right through SARS and MERS. The modern world has continued travel in spite of many contagious diseases, including smallpox and tuberculosis. I'm hoping governments take cues from epidemiologists, not Chicken Littles.

The problem is that the epidemiologists can also be the chicken littles. With this pandemic in the collective memory, chicken little will have a lot of power at least for a decade or so.


Yes, any worthwhile epidemiologist will tell you the best way to control an outbreak and stop the spread of disease is to contain it...and the best way to contain it is strict quarantine and travel lock downs. Small pox and tuberculosis are terrible analogies because we have vaccines for both-there was and still is no approved vaccine for Covid-19 and there probably won’t be one for the next novel outbreak either (which may not be as contagious/serious). Novel outbreaks usually don’t.

A greater focus listening to epidemiologist for Covid-19 in the west may have lessened the size of the impact, but with no political or economic boundaries they would have still argued for a travel ban to Asia (and those who recently flew to Asia) in the early months of 2020 when it was still primarily in China.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 11:08 am

GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
Doesn't bode well for the 77X either.


The problem is not there.

Many had intimately expressed wishful thinking that the 777-X would be a failed program, mainly because of the COVID-19 crisis.

I conspired this nonsense that he would be the ONLY one to undergo cancellations.

And now, the facts clearly prove me right with the relatively big A350 aircraft

In addition, Catay Pacific has still not confirmed the cancellation of the twin engine 400 seaters.
And I pointed out already a few weeks ago that the information was only a rumor! ...
Last edited by Checklist787 on Thu May 28, 2020 11:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
"No limit to my poooWer!!!
Do it! "...
 
Checklist787
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 11:10 am

PepeTheFrog wrote:
flee wrote:
Frankly, I don't think EY will survive Covid-19. So we can say goodbye to all their aircraft in the next year or two.


Indeed. EY also deferred a large chunk of its 787 deliveries. The aircraft may never get delivered.


As long as it is not official.
This remains only your wishful thinking ...
Why mix the false with the real?
"No limit to my poooWer!!!
Do it! "...
 
Checklist787
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 11:35 am

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
Ishrion wrote:


No airlines going to validating speculations are they???!!


Unfortunately,
Reuters is a reliable source claims the opposite.

Passions blind the reason...
"No limit to my poooWer!!!
Do it! "...
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 12:47 pm

Checklist787 wrote:
MileHFL400 wrote:
FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Etihad already cancal most of that ordeer


No they haven’t. According to Boeing’s books they are still on order.



Absolutely...

Sad to see that people hasten to see the 777-X fail while giving lifebuoys to the A350 ...
What is this for if not the denial to appease their spirits ...

The 777-X remains a strong program.

The A350-1000 is clearly injured.

The 777 is a thorn on the side of the Airbus widebody, historically speaking. And this thorn is not ready to be secreted, and creates deep disappointment in people's minds...


A strong program in an era when better fuel efficiency is less of an advantage and larger aircraft is more of a disadvantage? You are more optimistic than many. For EY, paying for an expensive aircraft that is harder to fill doesn't scream good business sense to me.

The difference: the A35K has a smaller sibling that is doing well and is better placed for a world with depressed demand, the 777X doesn't have this fallback.

That the order is still on the books is no guarantee: see VS A380s for the past and (probably) UA A350s for the future. We'll have to wait and see, but I don't think the future for the 777X is that bright.
 
Opus99
Posts: 1299
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 12:59 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
MileHFL400 wrote:

No they haven’t. According to Boeing’s books they are still on order.



Absolutely...

Sad to see that people hasten to see the 777-X fail while giving lifebuoys to the A350 ...
What is this for if not the denial to appease their spirits ...

The 777-X remains a strong program.

The A350-1000 is clearly injured.

The 777 is a thorn on the side of the Airbus widebody, historically speaking. And this thorn is not ready to be secreted, and creates deep disappointment in people's minds...


A strong program in an era when better fuel efficiency is less of an advantage and larger aircraft is more of a disadvantage? You are more optimistic than many. For EY, paying for an expensive aircraft that is harder to fill doesn't scream good business sense to me.

The difference: the A35K has a smaller sibling that is doing well and is better placed for a world with depressed demand, the 777X doesn't have this fallback.

That the order is still on the books is no guarantee: see VS A380s for the past and (probably) UA A350s for the future. We'll have to wait and see, but I don't think the future for the 777X is that bright.

But that’s the thing though. The 777X doesn’t have to be more fuel efficient than the A35K to do well, they just have to be somewhat comparable. The revenue potential gain must heavily outweigh the increased Fuel burn of the 777X compared to the A35K such that even if I can’t fill a 779 but can fill an A35K the difference in lower payout of the 777X would be quite minimal but in the let’s say (seasonal times - summer etc) when I can Actually fill the 777X the gains would be major. I don’t know if that makes sense. The 777X isn’t that big. If you can fill a 77W/A35K you can fill a 777X. I think The size of the aircraft is exaggerated.

The A380s problem is that the fuel burn is not even comparable in anyway to twin engines and it’s massive so once you can’t really push it to the maximum then you have an issue and that’s because It burns a lot of fuel.

But if a 777X can burns 6-7% more fuel than an A350 you don’t have much to lose If you can’t fill it up compared to the A35K you would still make good cash but when you have an A380 that consumes 40% more fuel and is MUCH harder to fill and when you don’t you still lose money

This is just my thinking anyway, I may not be correct
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 2:07 pm

Opus99 wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:


Absolutely...

Sad to see that people hasten to see the 777-X fail while giving lifebuoys to the A350 ...
What is this for if not the denial to appease their spirits ...

The 777-X remains a strong program.

The A350-1000 is clearly injured.

The 777 is a thorn on the side of the Airbus widebody, historically speaking. And this thorn is not ready to be secreted, and creates deep disappointment in people's minds...


A strong program in an era when better fuel efficiency is less of an advantage and larger aircraft is more of a disadvantage? You are more optimistic than many. For EY, paying for an expensive aircraft that is harder to fill doesn't scream good business sense to me.

The difference: the A35K has a smaller sibling that is doing well and is better placed for a world with depressed demand, the 777X doesn't have this fallback.

That the order is still on the books is no guarantee: see VS A380s for the past and (probably) UA A350s for the future. We'll have to wait and see, but I don't think the future for the 777X is that bright.

But that’s the thing though. The 777X doesn’t have to be more fuel efficient than the A35K to do well, they just have to be somewhat comparable. The revenue potential gain must heavily outweigh the increased Fuel burn of the 777X compared to the A35K such that even if I can’t fill a 779 but can fill an A35K the difference in lower payout of the 777X would be quite minimal but in the let’s say (seasonal times - summer etc) when I can Actually fill the 777X the gains would be major. I don’t know if that makes sense. The 777X isn’t that big. If you can fill a 77W/A35K you can fill a 777X. I think The size of the aircraft is exaggerated.

The A380s problem is that the fuel burn is not even comparable in anyway to twin engines and it’s massive so once you can’t really push it to the maximum then you have an issue and that’s because It burns a lot of fuel.

But if a 777X can burns 6-7% more fuel than an A350 you don’t have much to lose If you can’t fill it up compared to the A35K you would still make good cash but when you have an A380 that consumes 40% more fuel and is MUCH harder to fill and when you don’t you still lose money

This is just my thinking anyway, I may not be correct


If it doesn't have better costs per seat than an A35K (or 789/A359) then there's very little point in buying it, surely? I think it does have to be at least a little bit better. Your explanation about the 777X being better for the good times does make sense, the problem is... what good times? The ones we don't know will happen, or even if so, when? It's a risk airlines have to decide whether to take or not. The 777X may not be anywhere near as hard to fill as an A380, but it is still larger than the next largest widebody by a fair margin, and the trend is definitely for the smaller widebodies. If you can fill a 77W/A35K then sure, the 777X will be fine, the problem is if you can't fill aircraft of that size, as probably quite a few airlines can't Even when the 77W replacement cycle has barely begun you can already see some routes that used to be 77W mainstays going to the A359.

The other issue I think the 777X faces is that the A350 is (or else will be) pretty well-established amongst airlines that have or are likely to order the 777X. 4 of the 777X's confirmed customers (QR, BA, CX and EY, har har) have the A35K on order/in operation, a further 3 (LH, EK and SQ) have A359s on order/in operation, leaving only NH without. If airlines want to have a bit of flexibility in their fleet the A35K is no extra burden.
 
Opus99
Posts: 1299
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 2:20 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:

A strong program in an era when better fuel efficiency is less of an advantage and larger aircraft is more of a disadvantage? You are more optimistic than many. For EY, paying for an expensive aircraft that is harder to fill doesn't scream good business sense to me.

The difference: the A35K has a smaller sibling that is doing well and is better placed for a world with depressed demand, the 777X doesn't have this fallback.

That the order is still on the books is no guarantee: see VS A380s for the past and (probably) UA A350s for the future. We'll have to wait and see, but I don't think the future for the 777X is that bright.

But that’s the thing though. The 777X doesn’t have to be more fuel efficient than the A35K to do well, they just have to be somewhat comparable. The revenue potential gain must heavily outweigh the increased Fuel burn of the 777X compared to the A35K such that even if I can’t fill a 779 but can fill an A35K the difference in lower payout of the 777X would be quite minimal but in the let’s say (seasonal times - summer etc) when I can Actually fill the 777X the gains would be major. I don’t know if that makes sense. The 777X isn’t that big. If you can fill a 77W/A35K you can fill a 777X. I think The size of the aircraft is exaggerated.

The A380s problem is that the fuel burn is not even comparable in anyway to twin engines and it’s massive so once you can’t really push it to the maximum then you have an issue and that’s because It burns a lot of fuel.

But if a 777X can burns 6-7% more fuel than an A350 you don’t have much to lose If you can’t fill it up compared to the A35K you would still make good cash but when you have an A380 that consumes 40% more fuel and is MUCH harder to fill and when you don’t you still lose money

This is just my thinking anyway, I may not be correct


If it doesn't have better costs per seat than an A35K (or 789/A359) then there's very little point in buying it, surely? I think it does have to be at least a little bit better. Your explanation about the 777X being better for the good times does make sense, the problem is... what good times? The ones we don't know will happen, or even if so, when? It's a risk airlines have to decide whether to take or not. The 777X may not be anywhere near as hard to fill as an A380, but it is still larger than the next largest widebody by a fair margin, and the trend is definitely for the smaller widebodies. If you can fill a 77W/A35K then sure, the 777X will be fine, the problem is if you can't fill aircraft of that size, as probably quite a few airlines can't Even when the 77W replacement cycle has barely begun you can already see some routes that used to be 77W mainstays going to the A359.

The other issue I think the 777X faces is that the A350 is (or else will be) pretty well-established amongst airlines that have or are likely to order the 777X. 4 of the 777X's confirmed customers (QR, BA, CX and EY, har har) have the A35K on order/in operation, a further 3 (LH, EK and SQ) have A359s on order/in operation, leaving only NH without. If airlines want to have a bit of flexibility in their fleet the A35K is no extra burden.

Oh yes of course it has to have a better fuel burn per seat of course for it to be even comparable. I meant total trip fuel burn but seeing as it’s significantly heavier it won’t burn less fuel than an A35K but per seat it has to be better.

I think the trend is definitely for the 787 and a359 and you’re right we are seeing some 77Ws phases out for the 359 simply because significantly less risky which is why they will sell much much more than the 779. But the 779 and the A35K both have a place in the future. Demand will come back, will it be next year? I don’t think so, we will see something similar to 2019 from about H2 2022 according to analysts. Which is a year after the 777X comes online. I see the 777X staying with flag carriers and no one else and most have about 20 or less. If you’re a massive flag carrier like BA or LH you can have 30+ because you have the traffic and you’re slot constraint even AF as well seeing their large 77W fleet of 42, if they were to ever order it they wouldn’t need that much. Probably about half that etc. The A35K also makes for a fantastic 3 class aircraft which is ideal for most airlines, so I think it will take the bulk of that replacement of the 77W. But for the 779 I expect the Middle Eastern airlines to use them a lot including Etihad and major flag carriers around the world and airlines with huge transit traffic so TK etc, especially those with high premium trunk routes. This current order book I expect to see a top up 777X performs.
 
deltatrav
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2018 6:33 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 3:07 pm

So it seems A380 and A350 are here to stay (or join, for A350). Does anyone think the A380 will go to any new routes, or stick to the prior ones? Any thoughts on A350 routes? Cabin layout?
 
A330Inter
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 3:59 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 4:21 pm

Could PVG be a future destination? Seems to be getting the newest fleet 787-9 then -10, if loads are strong when the situation goes back to normal it could be an attractive business class market also to support trade between UAE and China?

The A380 network at EY doesn't need to change too much I'm sure:
- JFK, LHR, CDG, SYD are here to stay for the UAE local traffic and the potential transit volumes
- ICN was recently added with also local demand and transit potential of Koreans visiting Europe, so why not PVG next?
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2373
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 5:09 pm

The my plane is better than your plane gets tiresome. Both the 779 and the A359/A35X will do fine, not massive numbers built but production of both will be still going 20 years from now. Probably 70 built per year, with around half for each of them.

EY was having difficulty filling the A380 sufficient to be profitable with it in good times, I can't see them keeping it. I personally feel that EY will fade away as an airline.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1310
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 6:32 pm

Checklist787 wrote:
MileHFL400 wrote:
FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Etihad already cancal most of that ordeer


No they haven’t. According to Boeing’s books they are still on order.



Absolutely...

Sad to see that people hasten to see the 777-X fail while giving lifebuoys to the A350 ...
What is this for if not the denial to appease their spirits ...

The 777-X remains a strong program.

The A350-1000 is clearly injured.

The 777 is a thorn on the side of the Airbus widebody, historically speaking. And this thorn is not ready to be secreted, and creates deep disappointment in people's minds...


No, A350 would survived because of A350-900. Not because Airbus would sell 2000 A350-1000.

B777X wouldn't survived because the -8X is a sham and the order book for -9X started to crumble little bit.
 
marcelh
Posts: 1137
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 6:55 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
The my plane is better than your plane gets tiresome.

Exactly. Maybe a new subforum with The name “Kindergarten” will help....
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3688
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Thu May 28, 2020 8:07 pm

ewt340 wrote:
I really hope they kept A350-1000. But in reality, it would be best if they stick with all the B787 they got. I even doubt the usefulness of B777-300ER for them at this point. The A321neo and B787 seems to be quite good for them moving forwards.

Heck, they might even wanna consider canceling all their weird 6 orders for B777X and convert some of their B787-10 to smaller -8 and -9 at this time around. Just to make sure they could fill all their seats after the pandemic.


The B77W is right-sized. That really should be their largest plane...then they could have the B77L (freighter)/B77W/B789/B78X (one pilot pool) and A20N/A21N (one pilot pool). This is where if relations with Qatar were better, I could see a trade with QR...of A35Ks for B789s.
 
myki
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 6:43 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Fri May 29, 2020 7:13 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
I personally feel that EY will fade away as an airline.

This sums it up perfectly.

Middle Eastern pride gets in the way, and would rather run it as a billion-dollar-a-year-loss than admit a failure. In saying that, it is needed for the city and emirate - how else would people visit? So will they ever shut up shop? No, but it will reduce in size and breadth, fading away from being one of those airlines you instantly think of that can take you (nearly) everywhere ... the likes of EK, BA, etc.
 
User avatar
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:28 pm

Checklist787 wrote:
PepeTheFrog wrote:
flee wrote:
Frankly, I don't think EY will survive Covid-19. So we can say goodbye to all their aircraft in the next year or two.


Indeed. EY also deferred a large chunk of its 787 deliveries. The aircraft may never get delivered.


As long as it is not official.
This remains only your wishful thinking ...
Why mix the false with the real?


Wishful thinking? Try again: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... reamliners
Good moaning!
 
majano
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:45 am

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Tue Jun 02, 2020 7:00 pm

PepeTheFrog wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
PepeTheFrog wrote:

Indeed. EY also deferred a large chunk of its 787 deliveries. The aircraft may never get delivered.


As long as it is not official.
This remains only your wishful thinking ...
Why mix the false with the real?


Wishful thinking? Try again: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... reamliners

Why do you bring up a 6 months old article to discussion?
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1573
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:34 pm

Confirmation that EY wants to continue operating its A380s and also take delivery of the 20 A3510s remaining on order.

"Etihad Airways (EY, Abu Dhabi Int'l) remains committed to the further operation of its A380-800 quadjets and does not want to cancel its forthcoming A350-1000s, a spokesperson told the Executive Traveller."

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... 380s-a350s
 
RogerMurdock
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:01 pm

Re: Etihad lands at TLV for the first time

Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:04 pm

Now a 789 in regular livery en route https://www.flightradar24.com/ETD9607/24a94698
 
myki
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 6:43 am

Re: Etihad lands at TLV for the first time

Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:19 pm

RogerMurdock wrote:
Now a 789 in regular livery en route https://www.flightradar24.com/ETD9607/24a94698

I am assuming they are taking the 'back roads' because with the destination being TLV they can't get overfly rights of Saudia Arabia. Would that be right?

Also, good to see that this time happy to fly loud and proud in full EY livery. Hopefully there will be some pictures soon.

Hmmm, potential new destination? :stirthepot:
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2250
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: Etihad lands at TLV for the first time

Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:40 pm

myki wrote:
RogerMurdock wrote:
Now a 789 in regular livery en route https://www.flightradar24.com/ETD9607/24a94698

I am assuming they are taking the 'back roads' because with the destination being TLV they can't get overfly rights of Saudia Arabia. Would that be right?

Also, good to see that this time happy to fly loud and proud in full EY livery. Hopefully there will be some pictures soon.

Hmmm, potential new destination? :stirthepot:



KSA and Israel have existing non-public defense agreements. It's likely there will be more cooperation in the future given the shared concern for another nation in the region.
 
davidjohnson6
Posts: 1094
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: Etihad lands at TLV for the first time

Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:41 pm

Apparently more aid is being sent...
https://onemileatatime.com/etihad-airwa ... te-israel/
Not sure the planned recipients are that happy though...
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-israe ... KKBN23G1WS
 
planeguy
Posts: 361
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2001 4:42 am

Re: Etihad lands at TLV for the first time

Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:06 pm

We're certainly living in interesting times. There's no time like now to be a spotter.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Etihad lands at TLV for the first time

Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:08 pm

debonair wrote:
rampbro wrote:
Sometimes humanity wins out, even in the most challenging conditions.


True! But I am curious to know, if the ETIHAD titles were removed especially for this flight due to the conflict?


That was literally my first thought, too.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4894
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Etihad lands at TLV for the first time

Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:27 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
debonair wrote:
rampbro wrote:
Sometimes humanity wins out, even in the most challenging conditions.


True! But I am curious to know, if the ETIHAD titles were removed especially for this flight due to the conflict?


That was literally my first thought, too.


I'm guessing it's white because it was permanently phased out from Etihad service recently. It's just convenient they still had it when this job came up.
 
User avatar
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:17 pm

JerseyFlyer wrote:
Confirmation that EY wants to continue operating its A380s and also take delivery of the 20 A3510s remaining on order.

"Etihad Airways (EY, Abu Dhabi Int'l) remains committed to the further operation of its A380-800 quadjets and does not want to cancel its forthcoming A350-1000s, a spokesperson told the Executive Traveller."

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... 380s-a350s


So, another rumor has been put to rest.

Last month, Etihad took delivery of its 5th A350. Plane was ferried to BOD for post delivery storage.

Image
Delivery Flight msn388 F-WXAE 26/5/2020 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr
Good moaning!
 
xwb777
Posts: 1027
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:13 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:53 pm

Taking delivery = payment done? If that is the case, why doesn't Etihad put it into service? what the airline has paid is partial payment?
 
User avatar
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:56 pm

xwb777 wrote:
Taking delivery = payment done? If that is the case, why doesn't Etihad put it into service? what the airline has paid is partial payment?


Yes Airbus got paid for those 5 A350-1000s. Etihad cannot put them in service because they cannot train the pilots right now.
Good moaning!
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 11060
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Rumor: Etihad Considers Retiring A380s and Abandoning A350s

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:56 pm

xwb777 wrote:
Taking delivery = payment done? If that is the case, why doesn't Etihad put it into service? what the airline has paid is partial payment?

It cost money to put a new type into service. You have to train crews, buy various spares, get certifications, etc. If you can’t get out of your commitment it is cheaper to just park them.
 
asuflyer
Posts: 589
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:48 pm

Re: Etihad lands at TLV for the first time

Wed Jun 10, 2020 2:10 am

  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

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