JAAlbert
Posts: 1981
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:35 am

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 44):
An emasculated Airbus can clean up the scraps Boeing doesn't want while leaving the best meat for Boeing.

In the late 1990s -- and even into the early 2000s -- I was reading articles touting the ascension of Airbus and the death of Boeing. I remember reading one article that said that aside from the 737, Boeing had no real offerings other than the 777 and that Boeing could not count on the 777 to salvage its business. This all leads me to believe that what Airbus is going through this go-round is what Boeing was suffering through the last cycle -- and may suffer through again in the future.

Quoting HighFlyer9790 (Reply 46):
This is a tough one. people will jump and say VS wil take the 747-8I, but i say they MAY cancel their A380 order..foggy.

Why would Branson shelve the 380, but buy the 748? The 380 has great economics, passengers seem to love it, and Virgin probably got a very good deal for the planes. Unless Boeing is offering an excellent discount for the 748, it seems to me crazy that Virgin would dump the 380 for the 748.
 
douwd20
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 3:45 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:39 am

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 24):
I think that is a common misperception; that once it's in service the orders will pick-up. While they may pick up some, the dearth in orders is more likely a result of other factors, such as lack of demand (orders for the A380 dwindled to a trickle within the first 3 years after launch). And that goes to the heart of what a lot of people have said; that the A380's business case is simply too weak

 checkmark 

One need only look at the 787 order book. It's not even in service and has been a runaway success. However the 777 was not a runaway success until years after revenue service began.
 
aminobwana
Posts: 923
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:32 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:45 am

A) Reply 1, posted Wed Apr 25 2007 03:42:06 your local time (4 hours 11 minutes 53 secs ago) and read 4705 times:

Well, I think Branson is correct that the profitibility of the A380 is an unattainable dream unless maybe 500 more were ordered. But Branson is most likely speaking out of anger over the fact the A380 should've been well into it's second year of operating rather than still in the test and certification stage.


Even if BRANSON seems sometimes to speak irrationally, this is a pose. Do not forget that he mada billions out of little. And certainly he is not speaking out of anger, even if of course, as many other, he must be angry

B) WINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 1773 posts, RR: 40
Reply 2, posted Wed Apr 25 2007 03:44:05 your local time (4 hours 10 minutes 2 secs ago) and read 4724 times:
Quoting Stratofortress (Thread starter):
"Sir Richard, whose long-haul airline has placed a $2bn (�1bn) order for six A380s, said he feared the 555-seater aircraft would never sell in sufficient numbers to cover its development costs."
Even a buyer is doubting A380 viability. Are there any credible sources out there that expect A380 to be a financial success?
(Boeing and Airbus are not credible sources in this case because they will be selling their skewed view)

If Sir Richard Branson is so worried about Airbus, why doesn't he place additional A388 orders to help out.

One has to acknowledge that in doing so he will help provide work for the UK as they manufacture the Wing and Engines that will equip his 6 A388's on order.


Simply because he does not lead a charity institute. This kind of social thinking is killing AIRBUS. The first obligation of any enterprise is not to ,lose money, as finally, directly or induirectly, the people pays the bill !!

C) NA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 4355 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 11:46:06 your local time (3 hours 35 minutes 5 secs ago) and read 3735 times:

Let it fly first. If it proves to be a fantastic product in service I expect many, many orders still to come. But I do not expect the A380 to become a cash-cow as the 747 has been.


Unfortunately this doesn’t work. The product can be very good, but the market is not there, as the basic assumption that future demand increase will be for trunk lines working on Hubs, connecting two Mega-airports, is now substituted by non stop flights between any pair of international airports, as A350, B747 and B747-8i are able to provide with
Highly economical but smaller aircrafts.


D) Toulouse From Ireland, joined Apr 2005, 1619 posts, RR: 23
Reply 5, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 11:48:58 your local time (3 hours 32 minutes 13 secs ago) and read 3698 times:

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 1):
Well, I think Branson is correct that the profitibility of the A380 is an unattainable dream unless maybe 500 more were ordered. But Branson is most likely speaking out of anger over the fact the A380 should've been well into it's second year of operating rather than still in the test and certification stage-----

I presently tend to agree with you, but hopefully for the good of aviation, over the coming 20 to 30 years maybe we will see Airbus pull in sufficient orders for the A380. This aircraft needs to go into commercial service before I'd expect any/many other airlines to order it, so fingers crossed she'll turn out good in commercial service, and then I don't see why they won't gain the orders they need over it's life-span... that said, and as an Airbus fan, I do have my own doubt over the economic viability of this aircraft for Airbus, yet at least for us aviation fans it's a great a/c just for its huge size and the fact that it is the first ever "all" double-deck civil aircraft.


Unfortunately, economic reality supersedes the pleasure of nice technology. Many persons are fans of AIRBUS or BOEING by the latter reason. But you assess the situation
Clearly !! Of course, to spend billions now to see how it would work seems a little expensive,
On a lighter note: Do you know what in the German commercial world “NA?means ??


E) WINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 1773 posts, RR: 40
Reply 6, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 12:01:04 your local time (3 hours 20 minutes 7 secs ago) and read 3525 times:

It's worth noting that despite the profitability of the A380 program is still rather grey, it is good to note that nearly all A380 customers have systematically praised the A380's performance and targets and all this after the A380 suffered long delays.
Singapore Airlines - Ordered 9 more.
Qantas - Ordered 8 more.
Lufthansa - True 3L/100km plane (plans to order more)
Thai - Keeps A380 order.
EK - World Leader.
Qatar - Plans to order more. etc........................


It must be said that of course each major airline can put to good use a A380. The problem is the quantity, and if such is not big enough and the advantage in front of smaller aircrafts is not large enough, it does not justify the acquisition.
This is also valid for VIRGIN.
Note that SINGAPORE, THAI, EK and QATAR are catering to the same concept as AIRBUS (see C above) i.e that the will be (factually today they are) large hubs. But in the future, as said the hub need will diminish and all the concept will not work.
QANTAS, due to their position “far from anywhere?has a real use for the A380
LUFTHANSA has ordered the 400 ?467 paxB747-8i and try to convince the EU that this is for a different market as the 555 pax A380. Of course this is only an excuse in front of the German Government, very much even if indirectly involved in EADS, this being also the reason they are not cancelling the A380 now, but waiting that other begin to do

F) CygnusChicago From United States, joined Mar 2007, 24 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 12:02:07 your local time (3 hours 19 minutes 4 secs ago) and read 3502 times:

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 1):
Well, I think Branson is correct that the profitability of the A380 is an unattainable dream unless maybe 500 more were ordered. But Branson is most likely speaking out of anger over the fact the A380 should've been well into it's second year of operating rather than still in the test and certification stage.----------------
I agree with your view. Hindsight is 20/20. When Airbus was proposing the Superjumbo to airlines in the late 90s, and when Branson signed in the early 2000s, he never once questioned the viability. In fact he was incredibly excited about the opportunity to offer bedrooms and whatnot.
With this report he is simply taking a cheap shot at Airbus while they are down. Maybe didn't offer him A350XWB's at the old A350 price, and that has upset him. Be that what it may, it does seem as though we have entered an era of vocal customer CEO's in the industry. We've had Udver-Hazy, Clark, Choon Seng, and now Branson criticize manufacturers in public.


See A), C) and E). BRANSON in the 90?thought as many others that the big hub concept
was the right one. Now, he realize it is not so and be acting as you say, admits the mistake. A positive exception in the Diva-CEO club you rightly mention !! Of course, you will realize that no CEO from a longer established Airline is in this list!

_
G) MD80Nut From United States, joined Jul 2003, 740 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 12:05:15 your local time (3 hours 15 minutes 56 secs ago) and read 3444 times:
Quoting NA (Reply 4):
Let it fly first. If it proves to be a fantastic product in service I expect many, many orders still to come. But I do not expect the A380 to become a cash-cow as the 747 has been-----.
I agree. Once it enters service and proves itself in the daily grind of airline operations I believe we'll see more airlines order the A380. That's why I believe it's crucial there are no further delays in getting it into service. I hope everything goes smoothly when Singapore starts commercial service, I want to see the A380 succeed, like I want to see EVERY plane succeed.
I think reaching the 450-500 frame mark will be a challenge though. But I'd love to be wrong.


You are totally right. Any survival chance of the A380 will be gone if there are further delays. And of course, no delay means to deliver an aircraft in its definitive execution, not, as some forum member suspect in case of the No.1 SINGAPORE, a factual hand completed prototype with some provisional solutions, to be upgraded later!


H) AirFrnt From United States, joined Jul 2004, 1649 posts, RR: 13
Reply 10, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 12:54:10 your local time (2 hours 27 minutes 1 sec ago) and read 3012 times:

Quoting WestJetYQQ (Reply 9):
However, Mr. Branson is only half correct on his Airbus financial theory. It is very much the truth that Airbus has FAR from enough orders to break even on the A380 project. But, as soon as the first few get to be delivered, and the aircraft gets more of a fair chance to prove itself as an economical, passenger friendly choice for commercial airlines, orders will surely pick-up, and Airbus may be able to dig itself out of this hole it has dug.---------
The business case for the A380 was unrealistic before the A380 took to their air. Now they have had an idle factory line, additional market fragmentation about to occur, a horrible currency imbalance, high fuel costs and two bickering governments on top of everything. Add in Boeing's ability to launch a majority composite frame Y3 with a similar or better CASM advantage over the A380 with a smaller seat count, and the A380 will be done.--------
The A380 is underwater. It may eventually break the surface, but it will never achieve the heights that it ought to have to justify the billions of dollars in investment Airbus spent in it. It already has cost Airbus it's lead in the Airline market. But hey, don't take my word for it, listen to Mr. Branson, or Mr. Udvar-Hazey, or Boyd, or Aboulafia.


As said, the hub concept looked OK end 90’s. Nearly only BOEING opposed it, stating the non-stop-point-to-point-concept, also influenced by the desire to maintain the
Cash-cow B747-400 milking as long as possible and also because they thought that AIRBUS will not go through with the project, On the latter they were wrong, but reacted
In time by developing the B787 and B747-8i.


J Ikramerica From United States, joined May 2005, 8561 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 13:15:37 your local time (2 hours 5 minutes 34 secs ago) and read 2733 times:

Quoting Glideslope (Reply 12):
LOL, who is not these days? Sir Richard is going to cancel and grab some 748's. Watch closely.-------------
Well, 6 A380s doesn't replace 13 744s.
Expect him to order 8 748is, and then see what happens, keeping his 2014 A380 deliveries on the table for a while. After all, SQ may want them...


I do not follow your figures, but I agree that this seems plausible, VIRGIN ordering some
B748 to be able to substitute some of the B747-400 and A340 and delay the decision for
the A380 to see what happens. But I am not so sure of the latter, because the B787 order shows that he has no satisfactory compensation offer from AIRBUS


k) CygnusChicago From United States, joined Mar 2007, 24 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 13:43:28 your local time (1 hour 37 minutes 43 secs ago) and read 2485 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 10):
The A380 is underwater... . It already has cost Airbus it's lead in the Airline market.

It's not the A380 that cost Airbus the lead in the Airline market. The lead was lost because they did not have a competitive response to the 787. That happened in turn, due to the fact that they'd finished the launch of the A340-500/600 and couldn't admit that it was possible to build a plane substantially more efficient than than the A330. Nothing to do with the A380 whatsoever.-----------


I agree partially. Indirectly, the A380 has a really bad influence on the A320, siphoning the funds needed for the timely development of the A320NG

As to the Superjumbo - yes, currently it does not look like it will break even. While many argue it was a mistake - and from a pure single project ROI point of view it was - it still is a measure of success. Those 142 orders (or whatever the current count is) would have meant at least 142 additional 747 or 777 orders for Boeing. In addition, it is forcing Boeing to divert resources to the 747-800, which like the A350, is a plane they don't really want to have to build.

I am not sure that taking away contracts from BOEING by loosing a lot of money can be
called a success. As for the B747-8i I am not sure that they did not want to built it. It was
clear that they did not want to build a new model for the 400-550 pax range, but the 8i
is only a NG of the B747, even if with a more than normal upgrades. They could not expect to perform only with the B777 middle term and the B787 long term. I think the idea was to use the N747-400 for a while more
and than go to the 8i anyway. What the A380 did was accelerate this.


L) Flysherwood From United States, joined Jul 2006, 312 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 14:00:28 your local time (1 hour 20 minutes 43 secs ago) and read 2317 times:

Quoting CygnusChicago (Reply 7):
Have you ever heard Mr. Leahy act humbly in public about the situation that he put his customers in? If you listen to what he says, he still acts like Airbus management is doing a hell of a good job! Maybe Mr. Branson doesn't like the arrogance of Airbus management. I do not see where it is a cheap shot. When management screws up like they did with Airbus, they need to hear this kinds of criticism in order to ensure the listing ship is righted. Otherwise...


I have said this before: Mr. Leahy applied used-car dealer tactics on customers which supposedly are very sophisticated. That he was successful for years can only be explained that some of these customers are
not so clever, but mainly, that he was helped by the lack of elasticity and imagination of BOEING
before the new regimen there came in.

M) Flysherwood From United States, joined Jul 2006, 312 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted Tue Apr 24 2007 14:23:32 your local time (57 minutes 39 secs ago) and read 1683 times:

Quoting CygnusChicago (Reply 15):
Those 142 orders (or whatever the current count is) would have meant at least 142 additional 747 or 777 orders for Boeing.---

I am not sure spending $15billion to keep customers from ordering a competitors product can be measured a success in any way, shape or form.


Exactly. You said it much better I did in k) !!

Quoting CygnusChicago (Reply 15):
In addition, it is forcing Boeing to divert resources to the 747-800, which like the A350, is a plane they don't really want to have to build.---
If by now, Airbus has not figured out that the A350XWB is the airplane that they absolutely have to build and to build right, then the game is OVER!!! Are you really proposing that the A350XWB is only being built because they have to? The future of Airbus is at stake with the A350XWB!!!


I do not know what on earth AIRBUS was thinking. It is very evident that aside the
disorder at EADS, their main problem is planning. Examples
- 4 motors A340
- not foreseeing, if not before launching the project but shortly after, the danger
...of the point-to-point aircrafts for the A380
- not recognizing the drawbacks for airport handling of the full 2 levels A380
- not implementing in time the A320NG
- after realizing finally the need of a A350, not being able for a long time to
...present a satisfactory solution to customers
-
 
BN727
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 2:31 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:51 am

This is sad news for Airbus. I was hoping a great success for the A380 It's gonna be a great airplane when finished. The unrealist deadline for promised deliveries will haunt this project forever.. If I were to be a potential 787 or A350 customer..There is no doubt I would go with Boeing for fear of similar delay problems with A350. Good luck Airbus. Both companies build fantastic airplanes...Boeing has been doing it with a 50 year head start...Experience does count.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2726
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 11:12 am

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 50):
In the late 1990s -- and even into the early 2000s -- I was reading articles touting the ascension of Airbus and the death of Boeing. I remember reading one article that said that aside from the 737, Boeing had no real offerings other than the 777 and that Boeing could not count on the 777 to salvage its business. This all leads me to believe that what Airbus is going through this go-round is what Boeing was suffering through the last cycle -- and may suffer through again in the future.

No doubt, Also to clarify.. I wasn't speaking so much in terms of what will happen, but how Boeing would like events to take shape. Right now I think most of the Airbus supporters will see that the ball in in Boeings court right now, and that Airbus CAN'T get back on top of the market without Boeing dropping the ball again. Not to say they can't win back parity on their own merits over time, but to do more than that is not within their own power.

I'd also point out the lead times in this industry. Boeings problems arrived from the heart of the 80's when they failed to launch a 737NG then and instead handing Airbus 1/2 the narrowbody market on a silver platter as just one of the stunning mistakes they made. Airbus's problems today date back far into history too. The real signs of problems starts with the A340NG program, and its sunning failures when view in 20-20 hindsight. Then comes the 500 pound gorilla problem... or is that 560 ton gorilla? the A380. More than a decade gone and burned. 18-20 Billion US dollars gone and burned. Good will burned. Credibility burned. Political infighting inflamed. Airbus is big enough, and the A320/A330 good enough to survive this complete and total failure, but those assets are being burned up fast as they run out of people needing even cheap frames and/or the ability to produce them. More over they are going to be obsolete in a blink of an eye for this industry and thus come 2015 the A380 will have NOTHING from today to support its failures other than itself. This is why I said that the A380 burned up everything Airbus had built up over its lifetime. There will be one fine morning where everything Airbus has of value is the A380 and what they manage to do after that.

So the past of Airbus dies on the mistake of the A380. The future rests completely on the A350XWB unless something outside normal market forces pays for the A320 replacement. That said if the A350XWB fails.... Airbus is dead no matter the money put into it, Brazil, Canada, China, Russia will all be far better places to shop "Not Boeing".
 
Ken777
Posts: 9993
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 12:22 pm

I'm in the group that believes the 380 will be a very good airplane, but I worry about its potential to break even, Airbus has simply been hit with too many problems related to the plane.

- Software incompatibility which lead to the wiring problems.

- A two year delay in EIS, which caused unplanned interest expense for two years to build up.

- A minimum of two years delay in obtaining post EIS orders when the plane does show good performance - adding more interest expense.

- Boeing announcing the 748 program. I tend to believe that Airbus figured Boeing would stay with the 744, giving them a huge chunk of the market.

- The problems with the "F" sales - both at Airbus for the cancelled sales and at Boeing for a very popular 748F.

- The 748i providing airlines with a very valid leverage for much better discounts than Airbus had planned on giving. BA is a perfect example of this problem for Airbus.

While these factors could be sufficient for the 380 to fail to hit break even there is, I believe, a real sleeper that hasn't been fully understood - the impact of the Open Skies Agreement between the EU and the US. Look at the VS order - VS has the marketing pizzaz and in-flight personality to start 787 flights from a number of cities within the EU, all heading to the US. They can also add US cities more effectively with the 787 than with a 340.

After considering what VS could do with the 787 under Open Skies start thinking about all of the other EU airlines considering the same approach. All of these ventures make the 380 a less desirable investment, both in terms of route application and in application of capital. I won't give Boeing credit for "anticipating" Open Skies, but it is sure working in their favor!

As for VS, I believe that they will eventually pick up the 380s for some very specific routes where they believe they can fill it the majority of the time. I also believe they will get a few 748i's if they are satisfied with the operational performance - again for a few specific routes.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 12:33 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 49):
Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
- air traffic is supposed to tripple in the next 20 yrs according to Boeing (lifting its VLA forecasts)

Yes, but not everyone will want to go via a hub then, if they can go direct on a B787 or A350. Another example of where the A380 misses out.

But as I repeated before, the question is WHERE it is going to rise. Most of the people in developed countries that can fly already fly, and the airline growth mirrors the population growth.

That still leaves areas where the airline industry is catching up, like in India and China. But that massive growth is mostly within internal routes. And how many A380s have India and China purchased? IIRC, only 10.
 
PlanenutzTB
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:29 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:12 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
Well lets look:


- more then 1400 747 were sold in 40 years, despite doom scenarios in 1969-70.

- 600 of them will have to be replaced in the next 20 years

- air traffic is supposed to tripple in the next 20 yrs according to Boeing (lifting its VLA forecasts)

- fuel prices will continue to rise

- 80% of all long haul traffic is between hubs

- A388 is first of a new family with new versions (size / range / function/ cabins/ engines) to be developped over its live span

- airlines praise it technical excellence & performance

....

500 ships ? yeah, count me in.

Thanks for making a case for the future success of the Boeing 748i.
I am extraordinarily patient, provided I get my own way in the end.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15055
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:44 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
- 600 of them will have to be replaced in the next 20 years

Not with 747s or A380s.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
500 ships ? yeah, count me in.

that's the upper end, and I doubt the current A388 will be selling over a twenty year period, which means they will have to add more money to the project to reach that 500 number, which will push the program break even above 500 frames.

750 sales is already a poor ROI. 500 may seem fine, but it's a disaster for Airbus to have to fight and claw to just reach that number.

And 400 seems much more likely a real number, with 300 the low end of the spectrum. 400 would be a failure thanks to delays and cost overruns. 300 would be a disaster.

But the upside is that we are going to see at least 300 A380s in the air, which increases my chances of flying on one!!  Smile
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
rampart
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 2:45 pm

Quoting Toulouse (Reply 5):
"all" double-deck civil aircraft.

This sort of statement crops up regularly. Apart from being irrelevant to the discussion, it forgets a number of flying boats, the Boeing Stratocruiser, and as mentioned earlier, the Breguet 763.

-Rampart
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13565
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 5:24 pm

Quoting HighFlyer9790 (Reply 46):
This is a tough one. people will jump and say VS wil take the 747-8I, but i say they MAY cancel their A380 order..foggy.

Branson yesterday said that Virgin remained firmly committed to its existing order for six A380s.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 55):
- The 748i providing airlines with a very valid leverage for much better discounts than Airbus had planned on giving.



Quoting PlanenutzTB (Reply 57):
Thanks for making a case for the future success of the Boeing 748i.

Is it to early to say the 747-8i, despite Boeing reporting immense interest from 20 airlinesfor some time now, isn´t really the mother of all sales miracles? Boeing states it wants to sell twice as much 748i then 748F´s. Don´t know why but something has to be done, whats the plan?
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
astuteman
Posts: 7059
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 6:59 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 55):
The problems with the "F" sales - both at Airbus for the cancelled sales and at Boeing for a very popular 748F.

Prediction:- A380F production will prolong the A380 programme 5-10 years beyond the pax version production (in the end)....
(Has he gone mad?????  Wink )

Quoting Curmudgeon (Reply 41):
This may be more of a theoretical advantage. It is the last of the metal airliners, and may not have the legs for a long run against the expected better costs of the carbon airplanes

Except I think there'll be areas where even Y3 can't go in terms of competition....... Wink

Quoting Curmudgeon (Reply 41):
Then I had a glance at the world's top 100 airlines, and I can't for the life of me concoct a scenario that allows for the sale of another 100 airframes. Even 50 was stretching it.

How many options are there still up for grabs?
What will existing customers replace their A388's with?
How many -F versions will eventually get built?

The unknown is this.....
Specifically, everything about the A380 has been designed to accommodate a 625t -630t MTOW.
So what? I hear you say..

A 625t A388R would have a range of 9 750Nm at least, and burn very little more fuel per seat mile than today's plane (maybe 1% or so).
Hell, if Airbus are really smart and as RR to give the Trent XWB a compatible interface, the A388R would exceed 10 000 Nm with a fuel burn per seat-mile below that of the current plane.

When do you think a "ULR" Y3 would hit the streets (if ever?)

A 625t , 650 seat A389 would have a range of 8 750Nm at least, and burn about 13% less fuel per seat-mile than the current A388 (even though it's carrying a much bigger fuel load..).
If the Trent XWB "if" ever came off, then this 650 seater, would be good for in excess of 9 000 Nm, and burn about 17% less fuel per seat mile than the current A388.
Don't forget that's an "R" version.
(A lighter 8 000 Nm range model would burn even less fuel per seat-mile (2% or so..) )

Y3 won't even compete with this beast.

I can easily see many current operators replacing their A388's with this A389R on the hub-hub routes (and nobody on this web-site has yet convinced me that these routes will disappear in the next 10-20 years - yes, they'll certainly become a smaller percentage of total journeys..)

FEDEX and UPS will be delighted to pick up old A388 conversions in 10-12 years, to add to the fleets of new-build A388F's that they will have re-ordered by then........ Wink

Finally, after a fairly extended breather, it wouldn't surprise me to see a 625t A388F launched with either 180t/5500 Nm range or 200t/4500Nm range options, with possibly a 625t A389F in there as well.
OK, it still wouldn't have a nose door, but it would provide capability beyond the 748F (which the current A388F doesn't) that no other aircraft, especially not Y3, is ever going to match.

The design basis for these models is already there. It was built in at the start.
Are they niche models? Undoubtedly.
Who knows how many they'd sell, but between them I wouldn't necessarily rule out bringing total A380 sales to 400-500 frames just yet..
Would the derivatives generate money for Airbus? Almost certainly IMO
Will the entire programme make money? Almost certainly not IMO, but that doesn't matter one tiny bit, now that the money's already spent........  no 

Quoting 777ER (Reply 49):
With the current level of fuel prices, this will also benefit the B787 and A350 better then the B748 and A380,

That presupposes that the 787 and A350 are more fuel efficient. The biggest ones might just match the 748i and A388, but none of the smaller ones will  no 

Regards
 
ZKSUJ
Posts: 6875
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 5:15 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:07 pm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 49):
And airlines praise EVERY new airliner they purchase, so nothing new here



Quoting 777ER (Reply 49):
Yes, but that 600 will be shared among the B787/A350, B773/A346, B748/A380. Not all airlines that operate the B744 will want or need the A380. About 10-20% of the curent B747 operartors will need A380 size, while the rest will go towards B748, B773, B787, A350 and A346. I can see Boeing winning a good share of that 600



Quoting 777ER (Reply 49):
With the current level of fuel prices, this will also benefit the B787 and A350 better then the B748 and A380, and will make the B787/A350 more attractive to airlines compared to the A380

Could not agree more except to say that the 748 will be in the same league as the 787/350 in terms of RVSM. I can see many airlines operating the 748i in future, but we'll have to wait and see.

I too believe the A380 is a great feat in engineering and technology, but after 9/11 and other occasions, as well as the introduction of the 748i, I also believe that the programe could not have existed at a worse time.
 
ferengi80
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:23 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:14 pm

I always said from the original inception of the A3XX idea, that it would become another Spruce Goose. I for one wouldn't want to fly in anything so big; the B744 is plenty big enough for me.

My personal view is that Airbus is failing. I believe they will struggle unless they change their views. Passengers do not want to fly from hub to hub anymore. They want to fly from regional airport to regional airport. Boeing, therefore, have the edge with the 787, replacing the ageing 757/767 fleets. Also, the use of composites to reduce the weight of the airplane is an interesting step forward.

I can see in the future Airbus falling far behind Boeing. As a European, this is sad to say, but unless Airbus change their ways, they have difficult times ahead of them.
AF1981 LHR-CDG A380-800 10 July 2010 / AF1980 CDG-LHR A380-800 11 July 2010
 
Curmudgeon
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 7:19 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:43 pm

As always, its a pleasure to see Astuteman weigh in on these deliberations:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
Except I think there'll be areas where even Y3 can't go in terms of competition.......

Yes, there are benefits to sheer size and volume which, used intelligently, can confer an advantage.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
How many options are there still up for grabs?

39 of varying quality. Some carriers will probably exceed their current options, but that's offset by some who obviously won't. I don't think any carriers competing on the Kangaroo route, for example, will order more. The Japanese airlines have eschewed it, so the X factor is what happens with the Asian and American carriers, hence my pessimism.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
What will existing customers replace their A388's with?

I expect the first wave of aircraft to be in service with their original owners at the 2020 mark, approximately 20 years into the program. After that we'll see who's left.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
How many -F versions will eventually get built?

Beats me. While I was reading your post I was wondering if the airplane would ever lend itself to a combi configuration on long/thin routes. Having a full upper deck would make that an easier conversion, but perhaps doors would be a problem.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
Hell, if Airbus are really smart and as RR to give the Trent XWB a compatible interface, the A388R would exceed 10 000 Nm with a fuel burn per seat-mile below that of the current plane.

But again, impressive as that sounds, where's the demand? I don't think that there would be many routes that long with that kind of demand. Even Syd-LHR would support at best 8-10 airplanes doing that between two carriers. Probably less. I'd think that a 788SP would be a better option there, but QF (for example) can't get Boeing's interest on such a sub-niche aircraft.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
Will the entire programme make money? Almost certainly not IMO, but that doesn't matter one tiny bit, now that the money's already spent........

Yes indeed correct. But never kick a man unless he's down, right? Certainly they will be in the red in 15 years, but as you and I agree, there are some intangible benefits that will accrue. (perhaps by now squandered, perhaps not). I was reminded of "The Great Eastern" tonight reading some of these posts. I hope its not an apt memory.

Branson's warning to Airbus is only seven years too late to be prescient, but while obvious to most of us, it will make him appear the oracle of....of....of wherever the hell it is he spews from.
Jets are for kids
 
rwylie77
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 6:11 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:11 pm

What SRB is doing is purely a dig at Airbus for some unclear motive - maybe Boeing offered an additional discount on the 787's for him to make those comments? (his comments are basically Airbus are wrong, Boeing are right with their 787 strategy), which SRB does not necessarily agree with - especially being located at Heathrow!

I believe the 787 order is Virgin's bid to launch flights to the US from non-London European locations - such as Paris to New York etc - Heathrow needs to double in size in the next 20 years and it's growth will always be behind the demand. Therefore I think we will only see the A380's at Heathrow and as this demand for air travel continues to grow, I believe the A380 will be the most commonly seen plane at Heathrow in 15 years time.

Estimates suggest the number of people wanting to fly in 20 years is going to DOUBLE. There is only so much space in the sky and only so much certain airports can grow. OK - Airbus aren't going to break even in the short term on this project - however, I believe their biggest opportunity for selling this aircraft is going to be in 10-15 years time and they are going to make a fortune.
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:43 pm

Quoting BN727 (Reply 53):
If I were to be a potential 787 or A350 customer..There is no doubt I would go with Boeing for fear of similar delay problems with A350.

Good Point.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 54):

So the past of Airbus dies on the mistake of the A380. The future rests completely on the A350XWB unless something outside normal market forces pays for the A320 replacement. That said if the A350XWB fails.... Airbus is dead no matter the money put into it,

If I were aibus I would attack the narrow body market. A superior A318/A319 replacement (lighter, etc) and a superior A320/A321 replacement, perhaps an "R" version with 757-like capibilities. Get into this market before Boeing, learn a lot, inniovate, and later apply this to (yet another) new version of the A350 once the 787 has come into service. Tart up the A330 with new enines in the meantime, and spruce up the cabin.

Airbus are so far behnd the power curve here, that there is a real danger that they will still be busy getting the A350 out of the traps and certified while Boeing is signing up customers for Y1.

Brian.
 
User avatar
SeJoWa
Posts: 509
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

RE: Mr. Aboulafia's Advice To Eads On Power 8

Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:25 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
500 ships ? yeah, count me in.

As long as you continue to post nice pics so we don't forget what we're here for, why not.
I must admit that seing so much mass in the air is mightily impressive.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 60):
Is it to early to say the 747-8i, despite Boeing reporting immense interest from 20 airlinesfor some time now, isn�t really the mother of all sales miracles? Boeing states it wants to sell twice as much 748i then 748F�s. Don�t know why but something has to be done, whats the plan?

That Boeing statement had me wondering too. If I recall correctly, they said the success of the 748F cought them a bit by surprise. But as long as they make money on the combined affair, that program is not a problem, especially since it's not vital the company's future.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
(Has he gone mad????? Wink )

Let's hope he's merely flirted with madness from afar. Very interesting contribution regarding the A380. However...

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
Except I think there'll be areas where even Y3 can't go in terms of competition....... Wink

The A380 is cargo constrained, never mind the marvelous, awesome wing.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
Y3 won't even compete with this beast.

See above.

Now, regarding the infamous hub to hub rhetoric, I simply see more secondary airports gravitating towards the status of secondary hubs in the not so distant future. That's why I'm so keen on Boeing's putative Y1+. Heck, Emirates could easily buy boatloads of those planes in order to fill all their A380s (and hence further increase the value of their hub).
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Wed Apr 25, 2007 11:56 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
How many -F versions will eventually get built?

I would say between 0 and 20 tops. The only two companies interested in the plane for cargo would be package movers and they both just ordered new Boeing planes. There will be tons of 744 conversions on the market in the next 10 years, the A380F will never compete on price.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
When do you think a "ULR" Y3 would hit the streets (if ever?)

Boeing will not make Y3 with less capability than the 777-300ER, which will be the small version. I would expect range around the 787 range, so around or over 8,500 NM. I cannot see Airbus making an A380ULR variant as I do not think there are any markets that would support that capacity with a city pair over 8,000 NM apart. Perhapse the Kangaroo route but thats what like 10-20 planes tops?

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
A 625t , 650 seat A389 would have a range of 8 750Nm at least, and burn about 13% less fuel per seat-mile than the current A388 (even though it's carrying a much bigger fuel load..).



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
Y3 won't even compete with this beast.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 61):
That presupposes that the 787 and A350 are more fuel efficient. The biggest ones might just match the 748i and A388, but none of the smaller ones will

All of these suppositions assume that you are going to fill all the aircraft the majority of the time which is the big problem with the A380. Lots of airlines got stung by the 747 in the past. Too many on too many routes depresses revenue for everyone and exposes the operator to a lot more risk than operating a very small number of VLA aircraft and more 787/A350 sized aircraft.

Even a 777 sized aircraft has substantially less risk associated with it than does an A380.

The only situation where an A380 makes sense is operating into a very restricted airport like LHR. The problem is open skies is going to strip off a lot of the feeder traffic that makes those airports the main point of departure for lots of international travlers.

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 65):
Estimates suggest the number of people wanting to fly in 20 years is going to DOUBLE. There is only so much space in the sky and only so much certain airports can grow. OK - Airbus aren't going to break even in the short term on this project - however, I believe their biggest opportunity for selling this aircraft is going to be in 10-15 years time and they are going to make a fortune.

10-15 years is crazy for the A380. It is the last mostly metal plane that will ever be made. It will be lucky to still be under manufacture in 15 years. If sales of a variant that holds 550 people is slow now how slow will it be when there is likley and equally if not more efficient option that spans the 300-475ish seat area? You can get the same efficiency or close to it and far less risk than a 650 seat airplane.

That has been the problem with the A380 since it was thought of. Airlines are increasingly risk adverse companies. Lots of them were already divesting 747's because they represent risk, open skies and new technology will just make it even more risky to get tied into something like the A380. The A389, while it has better economics, is even more of a risk than the A388 for lots of airlines.

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 66):
If I were aibus I would attack the narrow body market. A superior A318/A319 replacement (lighter, etc) and a superior A320/A321 replacement, perhaps an "R" version with 757-like capibilities. Get into this market before Boeing, learn a lot, inniovate, and later apply this to (yet another) new version of the A350 once the 787 has come into service. Tart up the A330 with new enines in the meantime, and spruce up the cabin.

Airbus is in no position to do that. Boeing is inside their development cycle for CFRP airplanes. An Airbus A320 replacement would be countered in very short order by a Boeing 737 CFRP replacement that would reach customers first.
 
sstsomeday
Posts: 821
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:33 am

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 1):
But Branson is most likely speaking out of anger over the fact the A380 should've been well into it's second year of operating rather than still in the test and certification stage.

I don't see what Sir RIchard gets out of this public statement, since he will supposedly be operating the bird. Even if he believes he is correct (which may well be), I don't see how the statement gets him anywhere from a business standpoint.

Does he expect to get further concessions from AIrbus in order to shut him up? Or is this just an emotional outburst?
I come in peace
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:34 am

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 55):
After considering what VS could do with the 787 under Open Skies start thinking about all of the other EU airlines considering the same approach. All of these ventures make the 380 a less desirable investment, both in terms of route application and in application of capital. I won't give Boeing credit for "anticipating" Open Skies, but it is sure working in their favor!

I would imagine that the lobbyists that work for Boeing gave their $.02 worth regarding this.  Wink

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 65):
What SRB is doing is purely a dig at Airbus for some unclear motive - maybe Boeing offered an additional discount on the 787's for him to make those comments?

Because Boeing needs SRB to slam the A380 for them...?  Yeah sure

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 65):
Therefore I think we will only see the A380's at Heathrow and as this demand for air travel continues to grow, I believe the A380 will be the most commonly seen plane at Heathrow in 15 years time

And where are all of these A380 going to be flying to and from? Seattle, Philadelphia, Boston, Accra, Lagos, Manila, Madrid etc...? There is no doubt that LHR will see the most A380 traffic of all airports but the majority of the traffic to be A380? Not going to happen! Remember OPEN SKIES!!!

Quoting CygnusChicago (Reply 47):
Boeing is based in my home town, I love them, but as an aviation enthusiast I feel to understand this irrational hatred.

They may be headquartered in Chicago but they will always be a Seattle company!  Wink
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:51 am

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 69):
I don't see what Sir RIchard gets out of this public statement, since he will supposedly be operating the bird. Even if he believes he is correct (which may well be), I don't see how the statement gets him anywhere from a business standpoint.

I believe that he is trying to tell the upper management of Airbus to pull their heads out of their rear ends!!! He is doing so because as an owner of an airline, he cannot afford for Boeing to have a monopoly!
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:51 am

Quoting Glideslope (Reply 48):
How could that be possible? It must be at or above 500 frames by now? They will never sell that with the 380F DOA.

The A-380 is nowhere near 500 orders. It is more like 175 firm IIRC.
One Nation Under God
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:08 am

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 68):
Airbus is in no position to do that. Boeing is inside their development cycle for CFRP airplanes. An Airbus A320 replacement would be countered in very short order by a Boeing 737 CFRP replacement that would reach customers first.

I would assume that most commercial airliners of teh future will be CRFP. I was assuming an A320 family replacement from Airbus would be as well.

IIRC around the time the 744 was being certified there were productioin delays and Boeing missed teh ball with the 737 updates as well. Boeings management was also critised for not responding to customers. There was one airline (and I dont recall which one) which tolld Boeing "we wnat your planes, but support like we get from the guys at Douglas".
Interesting how history repeats itself.

Brian
 
b777a340fan
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:42 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:09 am

Viability, to me, is two-folds: financial and efficiency. The A380 may not be a financial success at the present time, but I think what RB was referring to is that while the A380 is efficiency and a success on a technical standpoint, Airbus may not recover its costs of the A380. It's in no way a criticism of the A380 aircraft itself, but rather a statement that like any other businesses, it's good to have profits. Am I making sense?
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15055
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:59 am

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 67):
That Boeing statement had me wondering too. If I recall correctly, they said the success of the 748F cought them a bit by surprise.

I think Boeing and Airbus are both very surprised that nobody is buying VLAs at all for pax service. Other than some follow ons for A388 launch customers (at launch prices) and the 20 748s for LH (at launch prices), nobody is buying at all. Period.

Take VS for example. Airbus was pretty surprised they defered the A380 for years, and I'm sure Boeing is equally surprised that they couldn't sell VS 6-8 748is along with the 787 order.

The VLA pax market is in stasis. It makes all of the projections seem a bit over ambitious. Though of course, it's only a couple years time, and things might change.

But the over popularity of the 787 is another indicator here. I doubt highly Boeing thought they could have 600-700 firm orders before first flight!
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 2:23 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 60):
Is it to early to say the 747-8i, despite Boeing reporting immense interest from 20 airlinesfor some time now, isn´t really the mother of all sales miracles? Boeing states it wants to sell twice as much 748i then 748F´s. Don´t know why but something has to be done, whats the plan?

Well, the 748i outsold the A380 last year. What does that tell you? And the 748F drove the A380F out of the market. All this for 1/4 the development cost of the A380. Sounds like a plan to me.

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 65):
Airbus are wrong, Boeing are right with their 787 strategy), which SRB does not necessarily agree with - especially being located at Heathrow!

SRB will be using his 787s for hub to point operations, just like everyone else.

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 68):
10-15 years is crazy for the A380. It is the last mostly metal plane that will ever be made. It will be lucky to still be under manufacture in 15 years.

Morgan Stanley predicts only a 12 year life span for the A380 vs. 60 years for the 747.

http://www.leeham.net/filelib/ScottsColumn042407.pdf

[Edited 2007-04-25 19:38:38]
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 2:23 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 75):
But the over popularity of the 787 is another indicator here. I doubt highly Boeing thought they could have 600-700 firm orders before first flight!

Actually on another thread someone placed an article from Flight magazine wherein John Leahy was slamming Boeing execs for predicting a possible 500 orders for the 7E7 before EIS. Calling them desparate. Looks like they were right on the money!!!
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 2:44 am

I love predictions by industry insiders!

In my decades of following the industry, I don't recall any of them being correct!

1. The 747 was designed as a good cargo carrier because it was assumed that SSTs would take the bulk of the business.
2. The 757 was designed as a 727 replacement, a role that the A320 filled wonderfully.
3. I don't recall reading that the 777 was meant to cannibalize 747 sales.

etc., etc., etc.

We can certainly have a fun time predicting what we think the future of aviation holds, just putting a little perspective out there as to the large percentage of a.netters and others who will be WRONG in their predictions.
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 2:55 am

Quoting B777A340Fan (Reply 74):
Viability, to me, is two-folds: financial and efficiency. The A380 may not be a financial success at the present time, but I think what RB was referring to is that while the A380 is efficiency and a success on a technical standpoint, Airbus may not recover its costs of the A380. It's in no way a criticism of the A380 aircraft itself, but rather a statement that like any other businesses, it's good to have profits. Am I making sense?

You are correct. SRB's statements is meant in no way to put down the A380 as an aircraft. It is meant to slap the management of Airbus about the realities of the program from a financial standpoint. I am surprised we haven't heard from the group that would say that SRB actually means "deferred profits" not possible LOSSES. Astuteman?
 
rwylie77
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 6:11 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:41 am

Quoting Flysherwood (Reply 70):

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 65):
Therefore I think we will only see the A380's at Heathrow and as this demand for air travel continues to grow, I believe the A380 will be the most commonly seen plane at Heathrow in 15 years time

And where are all of these A380 going to be flying to and from? Seattle, Philadelphia, Boston, Accra, Lagos, Manila, Madrid etc...? There is no doubt that LHR will see the most A380 traffic of all airports but the majority of the traffic to be A380? Not going to happen! Remember OPEN SKIES!!!

Yes exactly - Open Skies - even more airlines are wanting to fly into Heathrow or operate flights to the US from LHR. Delta, Continental, US and BMI have been campaigning for this for years, making slots even more valuable!
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 4:20 am

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 80):
Yes exactly - Open Skies - even more airlines are wanting to fly into Heathrow or operate flights to the US from LHR. Delta, Continental, US and BMI have been campaigning for this for years, making slots even more valuable!

Just because slots are limited doesn't mean you can FILL up 555 seats on an aircraft EVERYDAY!!!  Yeah sure
 
rwylie77
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 6:11 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:24 am

Quoting Flysherwood (Reply 81):
Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 80):
Yes exactly - Open Skies - even more airlines are wanting to fly into Heathrow or operate flights to the US from LHR. Delta, Continental, US and BMI have been campaigning for this for years, making slots even more valuable!

Just because slots are limited doesn't mean you can FILL up 555 seats on an aircraft EVERYDAY!!!

Read my original post. No I agree, not today - but in 20 years time when there are 3 x as many people flying and Heathrow's growth and other London airports have come nowhere near to matching this growth, you definitely will be able to fill a 555 seat aircraft every day.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:33 am

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 82):
No I agree, not today - but in 20 years time

If the A380 is twenty years too early, it was a hugh mistake for Airbus to try to introduce it now.

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 82):
when there are 3 x as many people flying and Heathrow's growth and other London airports have come nowhere near to matching this growth, you definitely will be able to fill a 555 seat aircraft every day.

You just have to reduce a few A320s, 737s and smaller jets to free up capacity at LHR for 787s and A350s. There's no need for many A380s now and never will be.

[Edited 2007-04-26 00:34:14]
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:39 am

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 82):
No I agree, not today - but in 20 years time when there are 3 x as many people flying and Heathrow's growth and other London airports have come nowhere near to matching this growth, you definitely will be able to fill a 555 seat aircraft every day.

Open Skies means that you will NOT have to course through London to get your destination. And if you do from say,Barcelona to New York, although with the advent of the 787 and A350 I can't imagine why you would go through LHR, you are not going to have an A380 flying from Barcelona to LHR! That still takes a landing slot. The A380 definitely has a niche market to serve. But that is all that market will ever be. A NICHE market and you will have the 748I competing in the smaller end of that niche.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15055
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:56 pm

Quoting Flysherwood (Reply 77):
Actually on another thread someone placed an article from Flight magazine wherein John Leahy was slamming Boeing execs for predicting a possible 500 orders for the 7E7 before EIS. Calling them desparate. Looks like they were right on the money!!!

No, they are way ABOVE that number. Like I said, the 600-700 before first FLIGHT is a surprise.

They thought they could get 500 orders by EIS, one year from now. But they have 544 before final assembly of the first frame! (not counting the AC 23 option conversions, either).

Though could have 600-700 by first flight, and 800 or more by EIS, or 60% more than the desperate predictions Leahy talked about...

And that higher number, combined with the strong 77W sales, means that other airframe sales must suffer. And the VLA market has suffered during that time.

It's not coincidence.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 pm

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 82):
No I agree, not today - but in 20 years time when there are 3 x as many people flying and Heathrow's growth and other London airports have come nowhere near to matching this growth, you definitely will be able to fill a 555 seat aircraft every day

Again, the growth in developed countries will only go up with the population growth. There will NOT be 3X more people travelling there, as those who can travel by airplane already do. You can have significant growth in many developing areas that include internal traffic only. Saying that there will be 3X more people flying in 20 years does NOT mean that LHR will have 180 million passengers in 2027.

And if you need the A380 20 years from now, the current incarnation of the A380 will be quite obsolete by then.

Plus, there are hundreds of routes already that have much more that 555 travellers every day. Just because you do have the availability of filling up a large airplane does not mean that it is done now, or will be in the future.

Heck, even here in California, with 35 million people, the largest airplane used intra-state is the A320. PSA tried it with an L-1011 in the 70s and found out it did not work.
 
ncelhr
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Thu Apr 26, 2007 4:45 pm

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 86):
Heck, even here in California, with 35 million people, the largest airplane used intra-state is the A320. PSA tried it with an L-1011 in the 70s and found out it did not work.

Think Europe. Think Asia. 35m people over an area as large as California is nothing.
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:16 am

Quoting Ncelhr (Reply 87):
Think Europe. Think Asia. 35m people over an area as large as California is nothing.

OK. JAPAN. The most slot restricted airport in Asia is NRT. The two main Japanese Airlines have already stated that they do NOT plan to purchase the A380!!! What does that tell you when ANA and JAL who are based in a country where 40% of the population takes a vacation outside of their country, does not need the A380 to cope with that kind of demand?!?  Yeah sure
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:44 am

Quoting Ncelhr (Reply 87):
Think Europe. Think Asia. 35m people over an area as large as California is nothing.

OK. The Netherlands. AMS is the second or third largest hub in Europe. What does it tell you when KLM hasn't ordered the A380. Out of all of their 744's, only 5 are non-combis. You would imagine that the amount of people traveling through AMS would warrant the purchase of an A380 by KLM, wouldn't you?  Yeah sure
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:34 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 85):
No, they are way ABOVE that number. Like I said, the 600-700 before first FLIGHT is a surprise.

They thought they could get 500 orders by EIS, one year from now. But they have 544 before final assembly of the first frame! (not counting the AC 23 option conversions, either).

It is so BAD when sales figures are so far off targer!!!  Wink
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:46 am

Quoting Ncelhr (Reply 87):
Think Europe. Think Asia.

Think Ryanair, AirAsia, and all the other airlines that have purchased massive amounts of single aisle planes in the last decade.
 
rwylie77
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 6:11 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 7:04 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 86):
Again, the growth in developed countries will only go up with the population growth. There will NOT be 3X more people travelling there, as those who can travel by airplane already do. You can have significant growth in many developing areas that include internal traffic only. Saying that there will be 3X more people flying in 20 years does NOT mean that LHR will have 180 million passengers in 2027.

3 x are the estimates of growth in the UK and government estimates that Heathrow should prepare it's capacity for. It will take 10 years just to get approval to add a 3rd runway.

Why is everybody here saying open skies will take away flights from Heathrow? All the airlines are expecting the opposite and many US airlines and bmi have been desperate to start flying from LHR for years. People here, especially from the US, seem to ignore facts and follow the Boeing party line of bashing the A380 and support the point to point argument.

It would be great if people could think more for themselves on this forum.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5518
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 7:23 am

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 92):
People here, especially from the US, seem to ignore facts and follow the Boeing party line of bashing the A380 and support the point to point argument.

It's not just the point to point argument; it's the history of the last 12 years showing declining use of VLA's. Air traffic has been growing dramatically, and yet 744 passenger sales have declined, DC-10's have been largely replaced by smaller planes, and the A380 has been a sales flop even before the delays. If you take out EK's order the A380 would have been considered a monstrous failure even if it had been on time, and there have been no new customers for it in about two years. SRB is absolutely right; the A380 may be a terrific plane but it is shaping up to be financially disastrous. And as far as the future prospects, I have difficulty believing that EK will actually fill all of their A380's, and will either not take delivery of all of them or sell them soon after if they do.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:49 pm

Quoting Rwylie77 (Reply 92):
Why is everybody here saying open skies will take away flights from Heathrow?

How much of the traffic that passes through Heathrow actually stay in London? How many are transit passengers of BA or VS or whoever to another destination? If you have the choice of flying from Manchester to Cairo (as an example) and did not have to course through LHR, would you? The beauty of the 787 and A350 and to some extent the 777 is the fact that these aircraft present the carriers with the option of offering point to point routes and to do so with some hope of making a profit. And given the choice, I cannot think of many people that would not opt to avoid LHR if they were given the opportunity. As a businessman that has had to transit at LHR several times over the years, I have a little bit of experience to know what this is like. Further, I am so excited about the fact that I may soon be able to fly NWA to Asia and not have to stop at NRT, just to reach my final destination, whether for a couple of hours or overnight!  Smile
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 2:24 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 93):
It's not just the point to point argument; it's the history of the last 12 years showing declining use of VLA's.

Boeing expects VLA deliveries to make up 10% by value of the entire civil airliner market over the next 20 years. Ten percent of an enormous number is still a large number. Their forecast for VLA deliveries has been increasing by 10% a year for two years, and may do so again this year on the strength of the 748 market. We'll see the new CMO at Le Bourget, and I would bet you a beer it will be north of 1100.

Big version: Width: 676 Height: 646 File size: 24kb


I agree that the A380 program will on the whole be a financial loss for Airbus. But not for lack of market-- rather, because they so royally screwed up the production ramp-up.
 
redflyer
Posts: 3905
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 3:30 pm

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 95):
Boeing expects VLA deliveries to make up 10% by value of the entire civil airliner market over the next 20 years. Ten percent of an enormous number is still a large number. Their forecast for VLA deliveries has been increasing by 10% a year for two years, and may do so again this year on the strength of the 748 market. We'll see the new CMO at Le Bourget, and I would bet you a beer it will be north of 1100.

If the CMO is ~$2 trillion, which is the approximate number I've read in the past, 10% of that adds up to $200 billion. 1100 airframes would equate to roughly $181 million per airframe to achieve the $200 billion value of that market segment. I suppose the discount percentages we've seen tossed about on this forum (roughly 35%) would put that figure on par for what a 748 typically sells for with discounts.

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 95):
I agree that the A380 program will on the whole be a financial loss for Airbus. But not for lack of market-- rather, because they so royally screwed up the production ramp-up.

You have to look at this from a financial standpoint. Even if the market for VLAs is 1100 airframes (Airbus' figures have been about 400 frames north of that), the majority of those will come in the 2nd half of that 20 year period -- on a graph you'd see a gradual curve up. So no matter how you slice and dice the numbers, any VLA development right now will not see a decent ROI for many years to come. As many have said (and too many have not heard), no one doubts the VLA market will not mature; it's just that from a financial standpoint (think ROI) it doesn't make sense right now because the demand will not be sufficient to commercially sustain the project for years to come.

The A380 would have been a financial loss for Airbus even before they "royally screwed up the production". Screwing up the production only worsened an already bad situation.
A government big enough to take away a constitutionally guaranteed right is a government big enough to take away any guaranteed right. A government big enough to give you everything you need is a government big enough to take away everything you have.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2726
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 3:57 pm

I think its safe to say that the main reason Boeings market forecast is going up is the unexpected growth of new build 748F being ordered. I think the assumption was that most would use 744 conversions till just recently. The jump in fuel prices however should make the 748F unbeatable if you can afford to buy them today instead of lesser planes. The new wing and GEnX work some serious magic on the fuel burn.
 
EnviroTO
Posts: 723
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 12:11 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 4:23 pm

The argument for the A380 being necessary due to slot restricted airports ignores the fact that (a) these airports are hub and spoke, and (b) most slots are being used up by shorter haul aircraft which are not going to be replaced by A380s. It makes more sense for an airline to serve a destination directly if demand warrants than it does to increase traffic through an overloaded hub and then need to deal with overload on all the connecting spokes. Looking at the success of RJs, it is easy to see that reducing the number of flights to consoldate passengers on a few larger aircraft is not what sells.

As for cargo versions of the A380 extending the line production... I don't see it. I would think there would need to be major enhancements to the power of the A380 to be able to handle a fully loaded upper deck if the A380F were to avoid being weight constrained all the time. The A380F might work for light cargo but heavy cargo will likely stick to the 747 which it better designed for cargo and the 777F. To reach the upper deck of a A380F a whole new set of ground equipment would be needed. With the 747-8F they realize the upper deck of cargo doesn't add much value and don't bother adding it to the airframe thus reducing useless weight and displacement. The A380F obviously has no options with an upper deck removed and therefore if the payload is maxed out with belly cargo and lower deck cargo the upper deck flies empty doing nothing more than increasing drag. I can't see there being a front load option for the upper deck of the A380.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rudy Van Prooyen

 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5518
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Branson Warns Of Threat To A380 Maker

Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:24 pm

Quoting EnviroTO (Reply 98):
As for cargo versions of the A380 extending the line production... I don't see it. I would think there would need to be major enhancements to the power of the A380 to be able to handle a fully loaded upper deck if the A380F were to avoid being weight constrained all the time.

I have been saying pretty much the same on this forum for some time. The real secret of the 747's longevity has been the fact that it was designed from day 1 to be optimized as a freighter, which the A380 notably was not. Double deck freighters just don't make sense, which was one reason why Joe Sutter rejected the double deck concept for the 747.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler

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