Qatar Airways News and Discussion Thread - 2021

817Dreamliiner · Thu May 06, 2021 7:59 am

rhysflies wrote:
Looks like the new J seat on Qatar will be less Qsuite and more like the older seat after all, albeit with a door:

https://www.headforpoints.com/2021/05/0 ... -revealed/

What I don't understand is why Qatar didn't simply modify the Super Diamond they already have. Why go with Safran? What's the incentive? In my opinion the Super Diamond is the better seat, and it's also made by Collins. What did Safran offer them?

Maybe they didn't go with Super Diamond because it might be seen as following BA with their new Club Suite, the same BA the CEO of QR referred to as a low cost airline :sarcastic:

Opus99 · Thu May 06, 2021 8:05 am

https://www.adient-aerospace.com/products

I believe Rhys has now updated the article. The seat is linked above!

VSMUT · Thu May 06, 2021 9:14 am

Opus99 wrote:
https://www.adient-aerospace.com/products

I believe Rhys has now updated the article. The seat is linked above!

I see it comes for narrowbodies too. Are they going into the new A321neo as well?

BrianDromey · Thu May 06, 2021 9:19 am

Looks like the demo seat is basically the QR seat with a few finish tweaks. I would expect if other airlines take this seat that the monuments around the seat would be modified. At the end of the day these are all variations on a theme.

The one obvious thing this seat has over the Super Diamond is the collapsable divider in the middle pair, which would be attractive for couples/families and something that some have criticised the Club Suite on BA for.

Opus99 · Thu May 06, 2021 9:25 am

BrianDromey wrote:
Looks like the demo seat is basically the QR seat with a few finish tweaks. I would expect if other airlines take this seat that the monuments around the seat would be modified. At the end of the day these are all variations on a theme.

The one obvious thing this seat has over the Super Diamond is the collapsable divider in the middle pair, which would be attractive for couples/families and something that some have criticised the Club Suite on BA for.

Expect this seat on Hawaiian. They were meant to the launch customers of this seat but as we know Covid caused them to push delivery back to 2023

Opus99 · Thu May 06, 2021 9:28 am

VSMUT wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
https://www.adient-aerospace.com/products

I believe Rhys has now updated the article. The seat is linked above!

I see it comes for narrowbodies too. Are they going into the new A321neo as well?

It’s possible that QR would have done a one stop shop. When Akbar describes the 321NEO business class it matches what Adient has on offer.

It won’t be surprising as apparently Adient Quality is very good from what I’ve heard from people who experienced it at the last in person airshow. But it would make sense as Adient originally makes cad seats for brands like Porsche etc

It’s also interesting that this was designed primarily around the 787 family, -9 primarily. (Obviously it’s a joint venture between Boeing and Adient) but it can of course be scaled up for a 777 or an a350

VSMUT · Thu May 06, 2021 9:39 am

Opus99 wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
https://www.adient-aerospace.com/products

I believe Rhys has now updated the article. The seat is linked above!

I see it comes for narrowbodies too. Are they going into the new A321neo as well?

It’s possible that QR would have done a one stop shop. When Akbar describes the 321NEO business class it matches what Adient has on offer.

It would explain why they didn't do the previous 787 seat with doors.

Although not a Q-suite, I can't wait to try it. I wonder if the 787-8 will be retrofitted.

CraigAnderson · Wed May 26, 2021 10:25 pm

Qatar Airways CEO: “the A380 was our biggest mistake”

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... st-mistake

AAB cites the "the rising fuel price" as one strike against the A380 but once again trots out his newly discovered green credentials, saying "the damage it does to the environment should be priority, and not the comfort" and "people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

Is this a knee-jerk reaction against 'flight shaming' or do you really think people are that particular about which aircraft they choose to fly on, or not to fly on, due to emissions? Would passengers really choose to fly on say an A350 instead of an A380 solely out of concern about the environment? I don't think so!

LCDFlight · Wed May 26, 2021 10:34 pm

Oh gosh that is precious. The reason the A380 was a mistake was financial. It did not make money for Airbus nor for the carriers who bought it, relative to alternatives like 77W. With the possible exception of Emirates, and that argument relies heavily on goodwill.

To paint this story with 2020s climate ethics at the core is highly revisionist and self-serving, although convenient.

F737NG · Wed May 26, 2021 10:37 pm

CraigAnderson wrote:
(...)
Is this a knee-jerk reaction against 'flight shaming' or do you really think people are that particular about which aircraft they choose to fly on, or not to fly on, due to emissions? Would passengers really choose to fly on say an A350 instead of an A380 solely out of concern about the environment? I don't think so!

No, I think you're right. Most passengers will not have a clue as to what aircraft they are on, nor what its environmental impact is compared to other airliners.

This smacks of another opportunity to speak about something that gets Qatar's name in the press somehow - similar to a certain European LCC whose mantra is any publicity is good publicity.

Edit:

LCDFlight wrote:
(...)
To paint this story with 2020s climate ethics at the core is highly revisionist and self-serving, although convenient.

Bingo!

Breathe · Wed May 26, 2021 10:41 pm

CraigAnderson wrote:
Qatar Airways CEO: “the A380 was our biggest mistake”

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... st-mistake

AAB cites the "the rising fuel price" as one strike against the A380 but once again trots out his newly discovered green credentials, saying "the damage it does to the environment should be priority, and not the comfort" and "people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

A less than subtle dig at Emirates? :biggrin:

If we really cares that much, why doesn't he put his money where his mouth is and retire Qatar's fleet permanently then? :lol:

Financially and operationally, it was a plane they didn't need. Much like Etihad, I wonder how much the owners i.e. the Sheiks were jealous of Emirates of their fleet of A380s and "suggested" that they were added to their respective airlines fleets to "keep up with the Jones"

LAX772LR · Wed May 26, 2021 10:46 pm

CraigAnderson wrote:
"people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

This is what he's come to now? Seriously?

PhilMcCrackin · Wed May 26, 2021 11:29 pm

The plane is a failure economically for them. They're just trying to spin it as, "Oh, we're soooooo concerned about the environment that we must remove this aircraft from our fleet" when the time finally comes.

I'd wager the A380 is probably more economical in terms of pollution per passenger or per mile than most aircraft are. Certainly more so than the 757/767/A330/A340/first gen 777s that continue to ply our skies.

TerminalD · Wed May 26, 2021 11:36 pm

CraigAnderson wrote:
Qatar Airways CEO: “the A380 was our biggest mistake”

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... st-mistake

AAB cites the "the rising fuel price" as one strike against the A380 but once again trots out his newly discovered green credentials, saying "the damage it does to the environment should be priority, and not the comfort" and "people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

Is this a knee-jerk reaction against 'flight shaming' or do you really think people are that particular about which aircraft they choose to fly on, or not to fly on, due to emissions? Would passengers really choose to fly on say an A350 instead of an A380 solely out of concern about the environment? I don't think so!

As measured in pounds?

iamlucky13 · Wed May 26, 2021 11:42 pm

Qatar is in the process of retiring half it's A380 fleet now, and planning the not-to-distant future retirement of the rest. At its peak, the A380 represented a small minority of Qatar's long haul seat count.

Their most important competitor is still taking deliveries, and a good half or more of their long haul seat count is on A380's.

I'm not surprised by this shot, but I am amused by it. :lol:

Speedy752 · Thu May 27, 2021 12:09 am

It fits with his recent framing. It falls into the category of “he’s not wrong but is also opportunistic”. I wonder if the likes of Ryanair will showcase the green credentials of a tightly packed plane which does in fact lower emissions per passenger, but environmental impact typically goes typically hand in hand with financial success of an aircraft. I’d say if anything he’s trying to make flight shaming a priority against his arch nemesis EK

MIflyer12 · Thu May 27, 2021 12:16 am

PhilMcCrackin wrote:
The plane is a failure economically for them. They're just trying to spin it as, "Oh, we're soooooo concerned about the environment that we must remove this aircraft from our fleet" when the time finally comes.

I'd wager the A380 is probably more economical in terms of pollution per passenger or per mile than most aircraft are. Certainly more so than the 757/767/A330/A340/first gen 777s that continue to ply our skies.

You lose that wager according to this ICCT report. The A380 is inferior in CO2 emissions per RPK compared to 777-200, 332, and even 767-300.

https://theicct.org/sites/default/files ... ct2020.pdf

N62NA · Thu May 27, 2021 12:24 am

Reminds me of the introduction of the 747. For several of the USA airlines, it was a "vanity" purchase. DL, NA and EA (though they only leased from PA) discovered early on that the 747 was simply not a good fit for their route network. It took AA a few more years to come around to the same conclusion.

bravotango75 · Thu May 27, 2021 12:48 am

AAB is a joke and an embarrassment to the industry.

Galwayman · Thu May 27, 2021 1:09 am

Hmmm I think he'll find the densification of his cramped 777s is easily his biggest mistake

prebennorholm · Thu May 27, 2021 1:49 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
You lose that wager according to this ICCT report. The A380 is inferior in CO2 emissions per RPK compared to 777-200, 332, and even 767-300.

https://theicct.org/sites/default/files ... ct2020.pdf

Apples and oranges here. Comparing efficiency you have to compare equal number of floor square feet per seat. This ICCT report talks about RPK. That means that premium configuaration level, general comfort level, and achieved average load factors become part of the game.

Equal floor area per seat and equal load factor, then A380 efficiency is beaten by few planes, and certainly not by the planes you mention. Problem is that pax want frequency, and then it is hard to keep the A380 load factors up.

And many A380 operators have configured their A380s as "flagships" - premium heavy. And also with very different Y class config, for instance some operators have 10 abreast on both A380 and also on their much narrower 777.

UA748i · Thu May 27, 2021 2:28 am

CraigAnderson wrote:
Qatar Airways CEO: “the A380 was our biggest mistake”

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... st-mistake

AAB cites the "the rising fuel price" as one strike against the A380 but once again trots out his newly discovered green credentials, saying "the damage it does to the environment should be priority, and not the comfort" and "people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

Is this a knee-jerk reaction against 'flight shaming' or do you really think people are that particular about which aircraft they choose to fly on, or not to fly on, due to emissions? Would passengers really choose to fly on say an A350 instead of an A380 solely out of concern about the environment? I don't think so!

I agree. This reeks of virtue signaling. Why not just be honest? Say "hey, the aircraft is not working out for us. Fuel prices are high, we're having trouble filling them up, they dont work for our network", stuff like that.

Just say what you need to say. Dont pander to the Green Mafia.

Revelation · Thu May 27, 2021 2:45 am

Breathe wrote:
A less than subtle dig at Emirates?

IMO, both AAB and STC are wind-up artists.

Over in our STC 777x thread we had this post:

smartplane wrote:
AAB is likely winding up Boeing and STC. How boring would commercial aviation be without these two?

Ref: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1461129&start=200#p22805599

Hits the nail on the head, says I. We already see the boredom coming. We've lost many engaging people such as John Leary, Tom Enders, Tom Williams and the two Randy's. STC's pushed back retirement several times, eventually he will go I presume. I'm not seeing any signs that we'll get anyone interesting to replace them.

iamlucky13 wrote:
Qatar is in the process of retiring half it's A380 fleet now, and planning the not-to-distant future retirement of the rest. At its peak, the A380 represented a small minority of Qatar's long haul seat count.

Their most important competitor is still taking deliveries, and a good half or more of their long haul seat count is on A380's.

I'm not surprised by this shot, but I am amused by it.

A quick gander at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirates_fleet suggests they should have passed half a while ago, and they're still adding more A380s, and the new ones are coming as 615 seater two class ships. Too late for me, I'll let someone else do the math to figure out the percentage of seats that are on A380s vs 777s.

Strato2 · Thu May 27, 2021 3:52 am

CraigAnderson wrote:
AAB cites the "the rising fuel price" as one strike against the A380 but once again trots out his newly discovered green credentials, saying "the damage it does to the environment should be priority, and not the comfort" and "people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

How cute. I will avoid travelling into Qatar for not because of this but because of their human rights abuses and employing partial sharia law.

ElroyJetson · Thu May 27, 2021 4:03 am

CraigAnderson wrote:
Qatar Airways CEO: “the A380 was our biggest mistake”

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... st-mistake

AAB cites the "the rising fuel price" as one strike against the A380 but once again trots out his newly discovered green credentials, saying "the damage it does to the environment should be priority, and not the comfort" and "people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

Is this a knee-jerk reaction against 'flight shaming' or do you really think people are that particular about which aircraft they choose to fly on, or not to fly on, due to emissions? Would passengers really choose to fly on say an A350 instead of an A380 solely out of concern about the environment? I don't think so!

This is just too rich. This coming from a guy who is the CEO of the flagship airline of Qatar. A nation that makes 95% of its wealth from hydrocarbons. :lol:

But now we're concerned about CO2 emissions?

It would take a special degree of stupid to believe this crap, but I suppose you have to give AAB some props for actually having the balls to say it.

zkojq · Thu May 27, 2021 4:05 am

PhilMcCrackin wrote:
The plane is a failure economically for them. They're just trying to spin it as, "Oh, we're soooooo concerned about the environment that we must remove this aircraft from our fleet" when the time finally comes.

He'd be singing the plane's praises if his A380 fleet had the economies of scale and was bringing in the premium revenue like his neighbor to the South East, environment be damned.

I do get tired of business decisions being turned into greenwash.

MIflyer12 wrote:
PhilMcCrackin wrote:
The plane is a failure economically for them. They're just trying to spin it as, "Oh, we're soooooo concerned about the environment that we must remove this aircraft from our fleet" when the time finally comes.

I'd wager the A380 is probably more economical in terms of pollution per passenger or per mile than most aircraft are. Certainly more so than the 757/767/A330/A340/first gen 777s that continue to ply our skies.

You lose that wager according to this ICCT report. The A380 is inferior in CO2 emissions per RPK compared to 777-200, 332, and even 767-300.

https://theicct.org/sites/default/files ... ct2020.pdf

Only because very few (if any) 767-300s and A330-200s have first class seating. Not really an apples for apples comparison.

Revelation wrote:

smartplane wrote:
AAB is likely winding up Boeing and STC. How boring would commercial aviation be without these two?

Hits the nail on the head, says I. We already see the boredom coming. We've lost many engaging people such as John Leary, Tom Enders, Tom Williams and the two Randy's. STC's pushed back retirement several times, eventually he will go I presume. I'm not seeing any signs that we'll get anyone interesting to replace them.

It's a good point. I hadn't realised how many colorful figures the industry has lost over the past few years. Oh how I wish John Leahy had a twitter account!

tommy1808 · Thu May 27, 2021 5:01 am

zkojq wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
PhilMcCrackin wrote:
The plane is a failure economically for them. They're just trying to spin it as, "Oh, we're soooooo concerned about the environment that we must remove this aircraft from our fleet" when the time finally comes.

I'd wager the A380 is probably more economical in terms of pollution per passenger or per mile than most aircraft are. Certainly more so than the 757/767/A330/A340/first gen 777s that continue to ply our skies.

You lose that wager according to this ICCT report. The A380 is inferior in CO2 emissions per RPK compared to 777-200, 332, and even 767-300.

https://theicct.org/sites/default/files ... ct2020.pdf

Only because very few (if any) 767-300s and A330-200s have first class seating. Not really an apples for apples comparison.

The A380 in their list has 1.16m2 per Passenger, which makes it

50% denser than the 763/E
30% denser than the A333
29% denser than the 772/E
25% denser than the 789
20% denser than the A359
19% denser than the 773/W

in that list. Sooo... people avoid flying the A380 in economy class because the premium classes are so premium?

Going by the atmosfair compensation calculator for DOH-NRT in Economy values are:

A380: 1306 Kg CO2/ 2527 Kg other climate effects (Water vapor/Ozone etc)
A359: 1023 Kg CO2/ 1980 Kg
A351: 1024 Kg CO2/ 1983 Kg
77W: 1191 Kg CO2/ 2306 Kg
789: 1038 Kg CO2/ 2008 Kg

If people made their flight decision based on CO2 emissions, they´d only fly on A359/A351.....

best regards
Thomas

enzo011 · Thu May 27, 2021 6:04 am

Speedy752 wrote:
It fits with his recent framing. It falls into the category of “he’s not wrong but is also opportunistic”. I wonder if the likes of Ryanair will showcase the green credentials of a tightly packed plane which does in fact lower emissions per passenger, but environmental impact typically goes typically hand in hand with financial success of an aircraft. I’d say if anything he’s trying to make flight shaming a priority against his arch nemesis EK

Almost, ads here touts their concern for the environment with their "green" fleet of new aircraft when they are on radio.

flipdewaf · Thu May 27, 2021 6:06 am

Breathe wrote:
A less than subtle dig at Emirates?

quite likely and for quite good reason:

UA748i wrote:

Just say what you need to say. Dont pander to the Green Mafia.

The green mafia include large companies who, like the one I work for, have both significant carbon reduction targets and significant travel budgets. In 2019 we were able to select more expensive flights based on carbon rating and if the airline partook in carbon offsetting. We were/are looking to build pricing in to take in to account the carbon footprint in everything we do. It might be virtue signalling but it might be a way to make money from others who are ‘virtue signalling’.

tommy1808 wrote:
A359: 1023 Kg CO2/ 1980 Kg
A351: 1024 Kg CO2/ 1983 Kg

That’s a stat worth it’s own thread right there!

Fred

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

tommy1808 · Thu May 27, 2021 6:16 am

flipdewaf wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
A359: 1023 Kg CO2/ 1980 Kg
A351: 1024 Kg CO2/ 1983 Kg

That’s a stat worth it’s own thread right there!

they do include average seats installed and the A351 tends to be a bit more premium heavy, but the difference will be pretty small in any case given its a more capable frame on top of being bigger.

best regards
Thomas

slcdeltarumd11 · Thu May 27, 2021 6:16 am

hindsight is 20/20.

The A380 was there to solve a problem they thought was gonna happen and they couldnt see the future to know how more fuel efficient planes would become.

The doomsday scenarios of needing planes that huge because of congestion just never happened. You win some you lose some, when trying to predict so far in the future. For the future im sure they will be alot more conservative on all plane builds. The A380 is a cautionary tale, but they took a big gamble.

tommy1808 · Thu May 27, 2021 7:00 am

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
and they couldnt see the future to know how more fuel efficient planes would become.

Rather they couldn´t see into the future that the average fuel price would be ~tripple what it was at launch for the next 15 years on average, turning that into an enormous chunk of operating cost eating up most scale effects the aircraft could harvest.

best regards
Thomas

airlinerart · Thu May 27, 2021 8:33 am

I'm not saying the A380 was a success but....

Jet fuel price when their A380s entered service was around $120 a barrel, its been significantly lower ever since and has barely reached $72 a barrel now!

Kind of shoots down their higher fuel price argument!

Revelation · Thu May 27, 2021 10:24 am

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
hindsight is 20/20.

The A380 was there to solve a problem they thought was gonna happen and they couldnt see the future to know how more fuel efficient planes would become.

The doomsday scenarios of needing planes that huge because of congestion just never happened. You win some you lose some, when trying to predict so far in the future. For the future im sure they will be alot more conservative on all plane builds. The A380 is a cautionary tale, but they took a big gamble.

Sorry, but it isn't hindsight, there were plenty of analysts and corporations saying A380 was too big back during the day. Airbus let itself get enraptured by having the biggest, and the rest is history.

Its inefficiency comes from not just being too big to start with, but also intentionally taking efficiency hits for future variants too. This meant it wasn't even worth putting new state of the art engines on it when they became available, they could not overcome the core inefficiency of the airframe.

vhtje · Thu May 27, 2021 10:59 am

CraigAnderson wrote:
Would passengers really choose to fly on say an A350 instead of an A380 solely out of concern about the environment? I don't think so!

I agree: no. Most passengers have no idea of the aircraft type they are on, or at least no idea until they get to the airport and board the aircraft, then are told the aircraft type by either the safety video or the safety card. If they bother to look at either.

Case in point: I booked and paid for my sister-in-law to visit me when I was living in SFO. I booked her on the BA A380 both ways, upstairs in Premium Economy. When she landed, I asked her what she thought about flying upstairs. She was adamant that the aircraft did not have and stairs and it was only a single-deck aircraft. Now, I actually saw her aircraft arrive and taxi; she was definitely on an A380 (G-XLEI to be precise)

My point is: the majority of passengers don't know what aircraft type they are flown on; time and again, we see they only thing they care about is price, price, price, price.

emre787 · Thu May 27, 2021 11:24 am

Revelation wrote:
A quick gander at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirates_fleet suggests they should have passed half a while ago, and they're still adding more A380s, and the new ones are coming as 615 seater two class ships. Too late for me, I'll let someone else do the math to figure out the percentage of seats that are on A380s vs 777s.

That information is not right. Last time they took delivery of a 2 class 615 seat A380 was late 2018. The newest ones are even less dense than their predominant 3 class configuration due to the introduction of premium economy, they "only" have 484 seats...

Also, they only have 15 A380s configured in a 2 class configuration, making up not even 10% of the whole fleet which imo shows how that configuration works for the airline/airplane overall

Source: https://www.planespotters.net/airline/Emirates

Ziyulu · Thu May 27, 2021 11:30 am

Of course it's going to have more emissions since it's a bigger plane with more space for travelers. The reason the 787 gives off less emissions is due to the 3-3-3 seating.

TC957 · Thu May 27, 2021 11:53 am

So...for a small country that has 3 VIP 748's, 3 A340's, 2 A330's, and 6 A320/319CJ's to ferry the odd bigwig and their hangers-on around, does AAB knock on their door saying they shouldn't use them for enviormental issues ?

xwb777 · Thu May 27, 2021 12:29 pm

What a joke! You suddenly think it's bad for the environment only because you are dumping it for economical reasons.

He thinks it's bad for the environment because he couldn't make a success of it, while his biggest rival did. Provided you fill it up, it is an economic aircraft, and no worse for the environment than others of its age.

TC957 · Thu May 27, 2021 1:16 pm

As an aside, in a recent seminar on the future of flying, he also stated QR are " not interested " in the A321XLR.
So, again, pretty much not what a lot of other airline CEO's think.

MikeMidd2001 · Thu May 27, 2021 1:30 pm

I think there are two different things here -

Was climate a factor when they made the business decision to buy A380s and build a network around them? Much less so.

Is climate a big factor now, and are consumers increasingly conscious of their impact when flying? Absolutely.

Is there data and research that shows it is a factor, alongside many others, when picking a flight? Also absolutely.

Is Qatar dumping the plane solely for environmental reasons? Almost certainly not. But are they aware that consumers are increasingly aware of their climate impact, including from some important markets for Qatar, so including this in their explanation of why they will move away from the A380 is a useful point? I think so.

LUKAS10 · Thu May 27, 2021 2:51 pm

ElroyJetson wrote:
CraigAnderson wrote:
Qatar Airways CEO: “the A380 was our biggest mistake”

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... st-mistake

AAB cites the "the rising fuel price" as one strike against the A380 but once again trots out his newly discovered green credentials, saying "the damage it does to the environment should be priority, and not the comfort" and "people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

Is this a knee-jerk reaction against 'flight shaming' or do you really think people are that particular about which aircraft they choose to fly on, or not to fly on, due to emissions? Would passengers really choose to fly on say an A350 instead of an A380 solely out of concern about the environment? I don't think so!

This is just too rich. This coming from a guy who is the CEO of the flagship airline of Qatar. A nation that makes 95% of its wealth from hydrocarbons. But now we're concerned about CO2 emissions?

It would take a special degree of stupid to believe this crap, but I suppose you have to give AAB some props for actually having the balls to say it.

Thanks for saying exactly what I would write. You saved my time ;-)

Capricorn · Thu May 27, 2021 3:30 pm

CraigAnderson wrote:
Qatar Airways CEO: “the A380 was our biggest mistake”

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... st-mistake

AAB cites the "the rising fuel price" as one strike against the A380 but once again trots out his newly discovered green credentials, saying "the damage it does to the environment should be priority, and not the comfort" and "people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

Is this a knee-jerk reaction against 'flight shaming' or do you really think people are that particular about which aircraft they choose to fly on, or not to fly on, due to emissions? Would passengers really choose to fly on say an A350 instead of an A380 solely out of concern about the environment? I don't think so!

I have yet to meet anyone who specifically selects a type because of environmental concerns, that would be a first. So far I have heard arguments from safety, comfort to nostalgia, but not the CO2 emissions. Also I guess a direct flight from Europe to Southeast-Asia would be better than needlessly stopping in Qatar..... so if what AAB states is true, its time fro QR to only offer direct flights for passengers traveling from and to Doha, all for the sake of the environment.

MrBren · Thu May 27, 2021 3:33 pm

AAB, stop gossiping and purchase more A350s.

VTCIE · Thu May 27, 2021 3:52 pm

Turn the clock back to Summer 2014 with the grand inauguration of Hamad Airport with the repeatedly-delayed A380 as its centrepiece and the A350 still months from making its global debut with QR, and you meet a luxury-focused QR drastically different from the carbon-conscious, post-blockade, COVID-affected QR of today.

To be sure, the A380 was only a vanity project for QR, and there’s a reason why it is not only the first and largest operator in the world of both the A350-900 and the A350-1000 with the world-beating Qsuite on board, but a big fan of twinjets in general with plenty of 777s, 787s and previously A330s.

Interestingly, many ME airlines operate the 787, including QR (and EK within a few years), but there is not another airline in the Middle East that operates the A350; TK does not count, and EY’s first A350 is still months if not years away.

lightsaber · Thu May 27, 2021 4:52 pm

LUKAS10 wrote:
ElroyJetson wrote:
CraigAnderson wrote:
Qatar Airways CEO: “the A380 was our biggest mistake”

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... st-mistake

AAB cites the "the rising fuel price" as one strike against the A380 but once again trots out his newly discovered green credentials, saying "the damage it does to the environment should be priority, and not the comfort" and "people who are very conscious about emissions will avoid travelling on an A380."

Is this a knee-jerk reaction against 'flight shaming' or do you really think people are that particular about which aircraft they choose to fly on, or not to fly on, due to emissions? Would passengers really choose to fly on say an A350 instead of an A380 solely out of concern about the environment? I don't think so!

This is just too rich. This coming from a guy who is the CEO of the flagship airline of Qatar. A nation that makes 95% of its wealth from hydrocarbons. But now we're concerned about CO2 emissions?

It would take a special degree of stupid to believe this crap, but I suppose you have to give AAB some props for actually having the balls to say it.

Thanks for saying exactly what I would write. You saved my time

Yes, that is an odd statement by AAB.

It was bad "metoo" planning to buy the A380s as to be seen as a competitor to EK.

The reality is, in my opinion, the new 3-runway IST is a much higher level of competition. ET at ADD will also dilute traffic.
The simplest way to cut CO2 is a shorter flight. This link shows, within the range, narrowbodies are more carbon efficient, so fly to the nearest hub...

MIflyer12 wrote:
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files ... ct2020.pdf

I think the A321xLR will result in a bunch of ME3 bypass (P2P). e.g , from FRA most of India should be served directly, I assume 4000nm@fra and that covers India:
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?R=4000nm%40fra

So interesting times ahead.

Lightsaber

Prost · Thu May 27, 2021 5:17 pm

The A380 does exactly what it was designed to do. Customers who bought it for reasons beyond what it was designed to do seem to be the problem.

VV · Thu May 27, 2021 5:23 pm

Prost wrote:
The A380 does exactly what it was designed to do. Customers who bought it for reasons beyond what it was designed to do seem to be the problem.

What does it do exactly? Or what was it supposed to do?

Babyshark · Thu May 27, 2021 5:27 pm

VV wrote:
Prost wrote:
The A380 does exactly what it was designed to do. Customers who bought it for reasons beyond what it was designed to do seem to be the problem.

What does it do exactly? Or what was it supposed to do?

Be the biggest airplane on the ramp.

FiscAutTecGarte · Thu May 27, 2021 6:05 pm

Babyshark wrote:
VV wrote:
Prost wrote:
The A380 does exactly what it was designed to do. Customers who bought it for reasons beyond what it was designed to do seem to be the problem.

What does it do exactly? Or what was it supposed to do?

Be the biggest airplane on the ramp.

Hands down best post of this thread! Awesome.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net