Cdydatzigs wrote:

I guess I ask because the line is still technically open as the last freighter will be delivered in October, right? If an airline wanted to order a handful of 747-8is, I'd imagine it would not be terribly difficult to start that line back up if need be. Unless I'm wrong because all of the supply chains have been ended.

The supplier of the fuselage closed and sold the plant where those parts were made.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ed-factory

There was talk of relocating fuselage production, but it didn’t happen.

IIRC Boeing wanted 50 orders to keep the line open.

ADent wrote:

Cdydatzigs wrote:

I guess I ask because the line is still technically open as the last freighter will be delivered in October, right? If an airline wanted to order a handful of 747-8is, I'd imagine it would not be terribly difficult to start that line back up if need be. Unless I'm wrong because all of the supply chains have been ended.

The supplier of the fuselage closed and sold the plant where those parts were made.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ed-factory

There was talk of relocating fuselage production, but it didn’t happen.

IIRC Boeing wanted 50 orders to keep the line open.

I wonder if he regrets it? I mean, that would be a good plane for what he is wanting. I'm sure Airbus has people drawing up new ideas. I mean, they have to have people working on possible new projects.

I mean.... huge cities with large slot restricted airports will always exist, hub and spoke models will never truly die. Heck, they will probably get a lot more efficient at printing money in the future.... To this end it is obvious to see EK crying about not having big enough aircraft when he wants them. Is his situation unique? No, BA could probably benefit from something a bit bigger. The A35K is great, but you're gonna need a lot of them between, New York, London and Dubai. In my opinion it would probably be a good idea for Airbus to work on a small cheap and cheerful stretch of the A35K if fuel burn can be kept at reasonable levels in relation to the A350 variants, advertise faster deliveries than 777-9 and lower fuel burn, sell a handful and kill the 777-9.

Anyway, Tim Clark is basically correct here.

If Tim wants an air[liner Bigger than the A350? Then He should Draw Up his design wish list and shop it to both Boeing and Airbus Himself with an Order 1to make it worth their while. this isn't a charity. you either BUY what they Have? OR? Make it worth their while to Build what YOU want.!! But you can't have it BOTH as they're thw!!
Airbus is Building what they can Sell to a LOT of people, They can't afford to build "One Off" models that only appeal to One airline. What Tim wants? Might only be good for the MEA airlines, Quantas, Air New Zealand, South African, and Singapore as they're the farthest away from damn near anybody. So? Tim might need to get a coalition together to do just that! If he can guarantee Airbus or Boeing 75-100 firm orders? I'll BET they'll damn sure listen to his needs. Barring that? He's "flapping his lips"? and "Beating his Gums!!" Put money with his proposal and they WILL Listen!!

@ strfyr51 Wasn't the 777-9 tailored to his and the other ME airlines? That seems as close as he will ever get to 'tailor-made'. With his habit of ordering and cancelling, I can't see Boeing or Airbus doing too much tailoring for Sir Tim in the future; pity for him that the 777-9 is so late.

Res 748 - Boeing has been and is burning the bridges behind them. This has been announced and known for a few years. The only thing open is more or less the final assembly line, and parts availability for planes they still are servicing. Someone can say just how that works better than me.

cv990Coronado wrote:

@ strfyr51 Wasn't the 777-9 tailored to his and the other ME airlines? That seems as close as he will ever get to 'tailor-made'. With his habit of ordering and cancelling, I can't see Boeing or Airbus doing too much tailoring for Sir Tim in the future; pity for him that the 777-9 is so late.

Tim Clark Not only wants the airplane? He wants direct competitors to give him the option of Basing each one of them over the Head with his demands because it Feels so good to him. I don't think it Matters to Him which airplane he gets as long as both Boeing and Airbus kiss his BUTT to sell it to him..

Well, for a man that has done so much business with both suppliers, then so what?

Sure, he maybe a pain in the neck but he does buy lots of aircraft. Remember, when he cancelled the order for A350s the 1st time, he then ordered 50 A380s, with RR engines.

Rgds

Isn't A350-8000 always a possibility if there are enough demand?
And it would be easier for airlines to upgauge RJs to free up slots. Afterall most airports only have minor share of their takeoff or landing per days being A380. And aircraft larger than RJ are already available widely.

Airbus can reconsider an A350-1100 or 2000... 79 m lenght

Someone is regretting not opening their wallet a bit more when Airbus and RR were offering the 380neo.

Unsure if Airbus would bother unless EK are gonna cover full R&T costs as well as the bulk of lost opportunity costs of any A350 stretch.

Although against that, they do like to keep design engineering rolling in some shape or form. What else is on the table right now?

Amiga500 wrote:

Someone is regretting not opening their wallet a bit more when Airbus and RR were offering the 380neo.

That option is not closed, there is the technical possibility to hang new engines off the existing airframe via a STC/factory mod. It really comes down to will they get the financial benefits for doing so, a modification like that would be worth around $80 million for the 4 engines alone. So you could probably convert 2-3xA380s for the price of one new 77X. That is a lot of extra capacity for the same investment.

zeke wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

Someone is regretting not opening their wallet a bit more when Airbus and RR were offering the 380neo.

That option is not closed, there is the technical possibility to hang new engines off the existing airframe via a STC/factory mod. It really comes down to will they get the financial benefits for doing so, a modification like that would be worth around $80 million for the 4 engines alone. So you could probably convert 2-3xA380s for the price of one new 77X. That is a lot of extra capacity for the same investment.

Always a possibility indeed; but when was it last done on a commercial airliner? Or even ever? I can only think of the DC-8 Super70s; I cannot think of any other airliner that had its engines changes via an STC/factory mod (i.e., on used aircraft)

It'll cost them much more now than a new build frame. The new build frame could have included further wing tweaks for cd reduction as well.

Would there be a way to "zero hour" an A380 while re-engine it?
Probably would have to include a full D check plus replacing certain parts.

JetBuddy wrote:

Would there be a way to "zero hour" an A380 while re-engine it?
Probably would have to include a full D check plus replacing certain parts.

Many of the A380 models have never reached their FIRST overhaul period.. they might first have to ascertain what the weight and Thrust load on the wings is to even allow new engines to be hung on it. the airframe might not even make a difference if all the rest is OK from the wing box outwards but the have to consider, Will the Landing gear even be tall enough to even hang what might be a much larger fanon the wing? and? Who Exactly would BE doing this work? Would Airbus even have the spare engineering talent available to Do this kind of work? The DC-8 mods were NOT done by Douglas so what company would do the continuing Engineering for the mod and Wno would do the initial Engineering for the engine and Pylon mods? If Airbus can't or won't do it? Then that's a damn weighty question.

fraspotter wrote:

Maybe for EK Mr. Clark but not for 99.9% of the airlines out there who have either retired the A380, getting ready to retire them in the near future, or never ordered them to begin with. Not to mention all the airports that were off limits to the A380 because of it's size.

Absolutely. And there are numerous low-hour 380's available for purchase from airlines who generally are acknowledged to have kept them up - i.e., Air France, Lufthansa, Qantas, even Malyasian. He could easily pick up another 10 to 15 frames which can be reconfigured into EK's needs.

zeke wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

Someone is regretting not opening their wallet a bit more when Airbus and RR were offering the 380neo.

That option is not closed, there is the technical possibility to hang new engines off the existing airframe via a STC/factory mod. It really comes down to will they get the financial benefits for doing so, a modification like that would be worth around $80 million for the 4 engines alone. So you could probably convert 2-3xA380s for the price of one new 77X. That is a lot of extra capacity for the same investment.

Yes it is closed.

There no new engine for a380

Period

Without that, nothing to re engine. Not be fuel efficency versus 77x either. Very bizarre statements you make sir.

I think Boeing and Airbus learned their lesson with the A380/747-8 affair. There isn't enough demand from enough different airlines for there to be 2 ULA. I think Airbus is ceding the largest model prize to the 779, knowing that it won't even sell a lot of frames. They know the money is in the 330/350/787 size ranges.

johns624 wrote:

I think Boeing and Airbus learned their lesson with the A380/747-8 affair. There isn't enough demand from enough different airlines for there to be 2 ULA. I think Airbus is ceding the largest model prize to the 779, knowing that it won't even sell a lot of frames. They know the money is in the 330/350/787 size ranges.

Lesson learned until demand will increase, if will increase a lot it will be natural that bigger planes will be built. If there would be an engine large and powerful enough eventually a new double decker would make sense.

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

zeke wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

Someone is regretting not opening their wallet a bit more when Airbus and RR were offering the 380neo.

That option is not closed, there is the technical possibility to hang new engines off the existing airframe via a STC/factory mod. It really comes down to will they get the financial benefits for doing so, a modification like that would be worth around $80 million for the 4 engines alone. So you could probably convert 2-3xA380s for the price of one new 77X. That is a lot of extra capacity for the same investment.

Yes it is closed.

There no new engine for a380

Period

Without that, nothing to re engine. Not be fuel efficency versus 77x either. Very bizarre statements you make sir.

Zeke usually knows what he's talking about with regards to Airbus.

And your statement is extremely bombastic.

If a program like this was started today, it would take at least 4-5 years until it was ready.

You don't know if there will be a new engine in that category down the line. Period.

Kikko19 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

I think Boeing and Airbus learned their lesson with the A380/747-8 affair. There isn't enough demand from enough different airlines for there to be 2 ULA. I think Airbus is ceding the largest model prize to the 779, knowing that it won't even sell a lot of frames. They know the money is in the 330/350/787 size ranges.

Lesson learned until demand will increase, if will increase a lot it will be natural that bigger planes will be built. If there would be an engine large and powerful enough eventually a new double decker would make sense.

We're talking currently, here. When the demand comes, then the makers will take another look at it. With Airbus selling every 320-series and 350-series that they can build, I don't think they're that worried about it. They got burned with the 380. Emirates just wants something offered so that they can play Boeing.

johns624 wrote:

Kikko19 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

I think Boeing and Airbus learned their lesson with the A380/747-8 affair. There isn't enough demand from enough different airlines for there to be 2 ULA. I think Airbus is ceding the largest model prize to the 779, knowing that it won't even sell a lot of frames. They know the money is in the 330/350/787 size ranges.

Lesson learned until demand will increase, if will increase a lot it will be natural that bigger planes will be built. If there would be an engine large and powerful enough eventually a new double decker would make sense.

We're talking currently, here. When the demand comes, then the makers will take another look at it. With Airbus selling every 320-series and 350-series that they can build, I don't think they're that worried about it. They got burned with the 380. Emirates just wants something offered so that they can play Boeing.

Yeah. At least 12 years for a new VLA if demand is there for the project and so on.

Technically there IS an engine for the A380. The Trent XWB-75 for the A358.

JetBuddy wrote:

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

zeke wrote:

That option is not closed, there is the technical possibility to hang new engines off the existing airframe via a STC/factory mod. It really comes down to will they get the financial benefits for doing so, a modification like that would be worth around $80 million for the 4 engines alone. So you could probably convert 2-3xA380s for the price of one new 77X. That is a lot of extra capacity for the same investment.

Yes it is closed.

There no new engine for a380

Period

Without that, nothing to re engine. Not be fuel efficency versus 77x either. Very bizarre statements you make sir.

Zeke usually knows what he's talking about with regards to Airbus.

And your statement is extremely bombastic.

If a program like this was started today, it would take at least 4-5 years until it was ready.

You don't know if there will be a new engine in that category down the line. Period.

Airbus couldn't convince engines makers to make new engine with a business case.

Result is a380 production dead.

Chances of engines maker coming to rescue when a380 production is over? Nil

Don't think any new engines ever produced for out of production civil jet. Wishful to think a38p will get new engines. It won't. A380s being dumped everywhere. Daybwill come when even the Emirates dumps a38os.

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

JetBuddy wrote:

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Yes it is closed.

There no new engine for a380

Period

Without that, nothing to re engine. Not be fuel efficency versus 77x either. Very bizarre statements you make sir.

Zeke usually knows what he's talking about with regards to Airbus.

And your statement is extremely bombastic.

If a program like this was started today, it would take at least 4-5 years until it was ready.

You don't know if there will be a new engine in that category down the line. Period.

Airbus couldn't convince engines makers to make new engine with a business case.

Result is a380 production dead.

Chances of engines maker coming to rescue when a380 production is over? Nil

Don't think any new engines ever produced for out of production civil jet. Wishful to think a38p will get new engines. It won't. A380s being dumped everywhere. Daybwill come when even the Emirates dumps a38os.[/url]

About “A380s being dumped everywhere”:
[url] https://edition.cnn.com/travel/amp/luft ... index.html

And an interesting read about the A380:
https://www.flightglobal.com/fleets/emirates-chief-rues-lack-of-a380neo-as-sas-counterpart-says-too-many-widebodies-built/148194.article

Speaking during the CAPA Airline Leader Summit on 7 April, Emirates president Tim Clark lamented the fact that Airbus had failed to develop an enhanced version of the A380 – sometimes dubbed the A380neo – noting that he had “tried so hard” to convince the aiframer otherwise.

“I was actually drawing it out for them… smaller tail, different wings,” Clark states, claiming the improvements would have led to a 12-15% reduction in operating costs.

He is concerned about what happens in the mid-2030s, as Emirates seeks to serve what he expects to be increasingly slot-constrained hubs including London Heathrow, Hong Kong International, Sao Paulo and Sydney without recourse to an A380 replacement.

“We are going to need that,” Clark says of such an aircraft. “The future for me is not a whole raft of single-aisles.”

He further warns of the “opportunity costs” associated with failing to fill that fleet gap, which would be felt throughout the air travel chain as fewer people arrive at those airports.

Clark has previously explained how Emirates’ existing A380s will be central to the carrier’s hub strategy through to the mid-2030s, as he insisted the airline’s business model holds up in a post-Covid world.”

So the A380 won’t be gone until the mid 2030s. Also interesting they don’t see the B779 as a replacement.

744SPX wrote:

Technically there IS an engine for the A380. The Trent XWB-75 for the A358.

Certainly certified but has a single production example ever been built?

The A380 isn't going to get a new engine. Both Airbus and RR walked away from 50 Emirates orders because Tim Clark kept on bitching about price. If he wanted them all he had to do was pay, too late now.

BoeingVista wrote:

744SPX wrote:

Technically there IS an engine for the A380. The Trent XWB-75 for the A358.

Certainly certified but has a single production example ever been built?

The A380 isn't going to get a new engine. Both Airbus and RR walked away from 50 Emirates orders because Tim Clark kept on bitching about price. If he wanted them all he had to do was pay, too late now.

Yes agreed

Possible a350 stretchings is the next possible solution of airbus can justify the spend. But needings the new engine I bet for higher mtow.

Airlines happy with 789 7810 359 and 3510.

Mr Clark probably retired by time a380s gone sp headache is not his so why he making the noise when no won cares

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Airbus couldn't convince engines makers to make new engine with a business case.

Result is a380 production dead.

Chances of engines maker coming to rescue when a380 production is over? Nil

Don't think any new engines ever produced for out of production civil jet. Wishful to think a38p will get new engines. It won't. A380s being dumped everywhere. Daybwill come when even the Emirates dumps a38os.

I just wish you would have read my post, and not words that are not I it. I stated it is technically possible to install a new engine either via STC/factory mod onto the existing airframes that EK has already paid off.

The A380 engine thrust class is same thrust range of the medium size twins, the A330/787 size. Engine makers will continue to make inroads in that area as that is where the largest market share is with wide-bodies. That is exactly how the 748 got the GNnx.

If EK were to convert 100 aircraft, that would be an order of around 420 engines, it would be very attractive especially if it was a derivative of an A330/787 engine.

There is a history of replacing power plants on quads, DC8, KC135, 747.

BoeingVista wrote:

Certainly certified but has a single production example ever been built?

Far as I know in service with JAL domestic and SQ regional

zeke wrote:

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Airbus couldn't convince engines makers to make new engine with a business case.

Result is a380 production dead.

Chances of engines maker coming to rescue when a380 production is over? Nil

Don't think any new engines ever produced for out of production civil jet. Wishful to think a38p will get new engines. It won't. A380s being dumped everywhere. Daybwill come when even the Emirates dumps a38os.

I just wish you would have read my post, and not words that are not I it. I stated it is technically possible to install a new engine either via STC/factory mod onto the existing airframes that EK has already paid off.

The A380 engine thrust class is same thrust range of the medium size twins, the A330/787 size. Engine makers will continue to make inroads in that area as that is where the largest market share is with wide-bodies. That is exactly how the 748 got the GNnx.

If EK were to convert 100 aircraft, that would be an order of around 420 engines, it would be very attractive especially if it was a derivative of an A330/787 engine.

There is a history of replacing power plants on quads, DC8, KC135, 747.

How much % improvement would retrofitting 787 engines give?

zeke wrote:

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Airbus couldn't convince engines makers to make new engine with a business case.

Result is a380 production dead.

Chances of engines maker coming to rescue when a380 production is over? Nil

Don't think any new engines ever produced for out of production civil jet. Wishful to think a38p will get new engines. It won't. A380s being dumped everywhere. Daybwill come when even the Emirates dumps a38os.

I just wish you would have read my post, and not words that are not I it. I stated it is technically possible to install a new engine either via STC/factory mod onto the existing airframes that EK has already paid off.

The A380 engine thrust class is same thrust range of the medium size twins, the A330/787 size. Engine makers will continue to make inroads in that area as that is where the largest market share is with wide-bodies. That is exactly how the 748 got the GNnx.

If EK were to convert 100 aircraft, that would be an order of around 420 engines, it would be very attractive especially if it was a derivative of an A330/787 engine.

There is a history of replacing power plants on quads, DC8, KC135, 747.

I wish you read my post also.

I did not the question tech feasibility. I k kW its feasible.

Business case is another matter which you didn't consider alls. But air bus did and a380 is done.

No re engine for it ever.

scbriml wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

Someone is regretting not opening their wallet a bit more when Airbus and RR were offering the 380neo.

When did Airbus and RR offer this A380neo?

Offering maybe too strong a word. It's not as if there was a final formal design to offer.

But a modified 380 with either derivative engines off 330neo or of 350 or even ultrafan were of course part of discussions with EK.

Since both Airbus and RR reluctantly decided to close the line and EK have been gurning about it more or less ever since, not hard to see who was unwilling to pay up.

Airbus has a great product with a359 and 1000.

As world recovery happens and travel normal again, these makes will be sought after.

Sir Clarks will have long done gonebtoo and the Emirates will enjoy them with 7779 on the fleets.

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Business case is another matter which you didn't consider alls.

You didn’t read my first post, “It really comes down to will they get the financial benefits for doing so, a modification like that would be worth around $80 million for the 4 engines alone.”

Financial benefitsbis not same as a business case.

737 max losses show that. As usual you the split hair because you cannot hadel a word against airbus and the dying a380

The a350 1000 is as big as it gets for the Mr Emirates Clark....

The A350-1000 isn't big enough for Tim Clark's ego.

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Financial benefitsbis not same as a business case.

737 max losses show that. As usual you the split hair because you cannot hadel a word against airbus and the dying a380

The a350 1000 is as big as it gets for the Mr Emirates Clark....

I have made three statements of fact,

1) there is no technical reason why the existing EK A380 fleet could not have new engines installed via STC/factory mod
2) the A380 engine thrust class is in the same thrust class as the medium size twin engine widebodies, so it can leverage from those programs
3) Historically 747, KC135, DC8 have all gone through this process to extend their lives

These are facts, not opinion.

New engines on existing A380s, that aren't even that old yet, wouldn't be cheap. You'd still be stuck with the oversized wing.
Really a tough call between keeping them flying the way they are, investing big money into the fleet, or just cutting their losses on the A380s and moving on.
Maybe more 777X down the line, when the A380s become a bit older, so Emirates can squeeze more money out of their expensive fleet.
I can't see Airbus totally abandoning the 777X-9 segment, maybe with an A350neo they are going to look at that?

zeke wrote:

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Financial benefitsbis not same as a business case.

737 max losses show that. As usual you the split hair because you cannot hadel a word against airbus and the dying a380

The a350 1000 is as big as it gets for the Mr Emirates Clark....

I have made three statements of fact,

1) there is no technical reason why the existing EK A380 fleet could not have new engines installed via STC/factory mod
2) the A380 engine thrust class is in the same thrust class as the medium size twin engine widebodies, so it can leverage from those programs
3) Historically 747, KC135, DC8 have all gone through this process to extend their lives

These are facts, not opinion.

Again, I never disputes the technical side

Happy yo be wrong but no commercial 747 that has gone out production has been re engined.

None.

Only engine changed when new model came. Like 7478 after 747400 after 747300 etc.

Nit taking about kc135 that's a military jet. We talks commerce which what this thread about. As usual u take off topic and I trypto bring back on topic.

So to conclude, whether you like or not, no business case exists and a380 will never be re engines.

Anyway. Only rewinged, lighter, re-engined (twin) and only for fewer critical routes, and only if traffic would increase double digit per year, would make sense for a double decker. It should be super efficient. So for the future we'll continue to incremental improvements (like a352 or 7710x)

stratable wrote:

New engines on existing A380s, that aren't even that old yet, wouldn't be cheap.

Nothing needs to be done in the short term, more like 6-8 years away. By that stage I would expect around a 10% TSFC improvement over todays best 70 klb sized engine. By that stage the Trent 900 would have been flying for around 25 years.

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Happy yo be wrong but no commercial 747 that has gone out production has been re engined.

Think you need to go back and have a look at what happened to the first 400 or so 747s built. The early 747s (esp JT9D-3 powered) were lucky to get 500-1000 hours out of an engine. I cannot remember now if the SUD conversion also included a engine swap, many early conversions 747 did.

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Only engine changed when new model came. Like 7478 after 747400 after 747300 etc.

I think many would disagree with that.

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Nit taking about kc135 that's a military jet.

I mentioned the 747, KC135, and DC8, Delta Airlines for example upgraded their DC8s in house to CFM56 engines. Boeing did build a number of 707-320C with CFM-56 engines.

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

So to conclude, whether you like or not, no business case exists and a380 will never be re engines.

That is an opinion you are expressed, however you have not shown any evidence. The article in the OP does suggest the CEO of EK does see a business case for VLAs. All I have expressed is an relatively inexpensive technical way they can maintain the capacity with the slots they have.

zeke wrote:

Think you need to go back and have a look at what happened to the first 400 or so 747s built. The early 747s (esp JT9D-3 powered) were lucky to get 500-1000 hours out of an engine. I cannot remember now if the SUD conversion also included a engine swap, many early conversions 747 did.

Sigh....as usual, you deflect.

We are talks about OUT of production jet...like the 380.

The engine change you mention on 747s were still in production

As to business case, there is non so can anyone provide it if it doesn't exist?

You seem to believe there is a business cases for the 380 to get new engines so why not show it?

Undisputed fact is no one wants re engine a380 no business case exists Airbus not gonna re engine and 380 production is done.

How's that for facts....

Airbus and RR would happily re engine. If EK paid them enough.

Of course, talk is cheap. So Tim clark will moan and gurn, but won't actually do anything of substance.

zeke wrote:

Think you need to go back and have a look at what happened to the first 400 or so 747s built. The early 747s (esp JT9D-3 powered) were lucky to get 500-1000 hours out of an engine. I cannot remember now if the SUD conversion also included a engine swap, many early conversions 747 did.

Replacing engines with upgraded versions of the same engine is generally not considered “re-engining”. From an engineering and certification standpoint it’s not even close.

zeke wrote:

1) there is no technical reason why the existing EK A380 fleet could not have new engines installed via STC/factory mod
2) the A380 engine thrust class is in the same thrust class as the medium size twin engine widebodies, so it can leverage from those programs
3) Historically 747, KC135, DC8 have all gone through this process to extend their lives.

Certainly feasible, and likely a re-engine has previously been discussed.

EK used Airbus goodwill to influence RR to sign for the 2nd tranche of RR powered A380's when EA wouldn't even price. EK wanted an EA PiP to address performance erosion, and RR was already in performance erosion discussions.

Against this background new engine options were likely discussed, but no consensus on sharing development costs, unit price and performance guarantees, and the financial basis of how T900 maintenance contracts were terminated (most are 12+2 - a liability for EK and lessor if withdrawn early, but an ongoing support cost also for RR).

Years forward, and post-MAX grounding, certification hurdles for a re-engine are higher, not only cost, but also the ability (and likely desire) of EASA and FAA to review / update what they perceive as issues with the original air frame. In a 2022 environment, the CV580 and DC8 7 series conversions probably would be less likely.

Never say never though. When you price an engine conversion with the cost of an interior upgrade...... Get BA on board and perhaps one other operator........... Package a 787 order conditional with a GE A380 re-engine (or A35 with a RR re-engine).... Terminate existing Trent 900 full service contracts to both parties mutual advantage...... And not impossible Airbus still has skin in the game, if the last 2 tranches include buyback options.

Zeke. It's feasible. FPE. It's not impossible discussions have been re-activated (or EK are attempting to link to new model orders). Every month makes it less likely, but.....

smartplane wrote:

In a 2022 environment, the CV580 and DC8 7 series conversions probably would be less likely.

The marketplace situation is also very different versus DC-8 re-engine.

With that you had a brand new civil engine (CFM56) derived from a military engine that was in use, different from contemporary engines (high bypass vs low bypass), looking for an application. The DC-8 re-engine came about several years after CFM formed and when they were almost running out of money, and I believe was actually signed before deal with Boeing to create 737 Classics.

Right now there is no engine out there where the engine OEM is desperately looking for an application that you can fit on the A380.

—

Saying it’s 400+ new engines is great, but prior to Covid RR was production constrained (see how long it took to get updated Trent 1000s to customers with parked 787s). While Covid may give some relief in that department because of reduces wide body production now they have to deal with supply chain and staffing issues. With contracts with Airbus and Boeing to provide new engines to 787s, A330neos, and A350s making 400+ additional engines on top of that might require significant production investment which

A) RR might not want to do for a short term project.
B) If RR does do they would pass those costs completely to EK, significantly raising re-engine price tag.

Polot wrote:

Replacing engines with upgraded versions of the same engine is generally not considered “re-engining”. From an engineering and certification standpoint it’s not even close.

Thanks sir...you understand my vjew.

zeke wrote:

stratable wrote:

New engines on existing A380s, that aren't even that old yet, wouldn't be cheap.

Nothing needs to be done in the short term, more like 6-8 years away. By that stage I would expect around a 10% TSFC improvement over todays best 70 klb sized engine. By that stage the Trent 900 would have been flying for around 25 years.

Based on your experience, what do you expect Airbus to do in terms of parts support if everyone retires the A380, and only Emirates decides to re-engine all their 120 A380s
to keep them flying for another 10-15 years? Would Airbus even be interested in providing substantial support for that long? I have no clue what is possible in this regard,
but I could see parts getting prohibitively expensive.