Due to length, here is part two.

Previous thread here: Almost One Year Since Last A 380-order (by N14AZ Sep 10 2013 in Civil Aviation)

I'm beginning to believe this could be the best year ever for A380 orders. Emirates, Qatar, Etihad, Singapore, Lufthansa and possibly more for BA.

Quoting goosebayguy (Reply 1): I'm beginning to believe this could be the best year ever for A380 orders. Emirates, Qatar, Etihad, Singapore, Lufthansa and possibly more for BA.

I wonder how long it will take BA to gather and analyse enough data to know just how well the aircraft works for them.

Quoting travelhound (Reply 270):
Over the last 10 years (to July 2013) there have been 102 A380 (VLA's) delivered and 141 B744 (VLA's) retired.

That does not reflect the total picture.

Quoting Scipio (Reply 272):
In addition, the last 10 years saw the delivery of:

- 418 B777-300ERs
- 89 A340-600s
- 9 B747-8i's

The 77W and A346 are almost as big as the B747, and much bigger than any other wide body that was available at the time the B744 was launched.

This is reflecting the total picture a whole lot better.

The intent of the analysis presented in my post was to show demand for traditional VLA's (747 and A380) and subsequently market share has been and will continue to decrease as the remaining 747's are retired.

There are still 326 744's flying today and the bulk of them will probably be retired over the next 10 year period. At current rates alone the A380 cannot replace all of these aircraft. If we factor in growth of market than the market share of VLA's will be substantially less than what it was ten years ago.

This is a clear trend and relevant to the topic being discussed.

Quoting iowaman (Thread starter): Due to length, here is part two.

Holy cow, what have I done!!!  

Quoting goosebayguy (Reply 1): I'm beginning to believe this could be the best year ever for A380 orders. Emirates, Qatar, Etihad, Singapore, Lufthansa and possibly more for BA.

??? Did you forget the word "not" in your sentence?   Airbus said they are "fighting" to get as many orders as deliveries.

Quote from the article Scipio linked in part 1 of this thread:

Quote: "Our goal is to get as many orders as deliveries in order to reach our goal of breakeven in 2015," Lahoud said. "We have some sales campaigns under way and some strong prospects around the world and we will do everything we can to reach this target."

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...9/10/us-eads-idUSBRE9890J920130910

In fact, this doesn't sound as 2013 will become the best year ever for A 380 orders, but I might be wrong, of course.


I would like to raise to more questions:

1.) A 389 vs. A 380-NEO or NG or Adv..
Many predict that in this VLA-chess-game, Airbus will be pushed by Boeing’s 77X to develop the A 389. But by extending the capacity of the A388 they move up in that pyramid of potential aircraft orders, where the market might be even smaller. The only justification I colud imagine is that only an A 389 is capable of replacing two 77Ws on a given route and operators such as LH, AF and EK have already officially announced their interest in a larger version.

Does anybody see the risk that the A 389 will become the A 346 of the A 380-family?
Wouldn’t it be better to focus on developing an advanced version of the A 388?

On a side note: I find it actually amazing that Airbus’ flagship is still flying with these old-fashioned wingtip-fences. If Boeing really implements the folding wingtips I really hope the will “brake the ice” and Airbus will follow with the A 380 and will overcome the 80m-restriction (and yes, I know, the they have limited development resources and usually they do not discuss their next projects with my sugggestions…  

2.) Indian A 380-embargo
How does the Indian A 380-embargo affect A 380-sales? I am sure at least Lufthansa and Emirates would utilize four airframes on routes to India.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 4): Quoting goosebayguy (Reply 1):I'm beginning to believe this could be the best year ever for A380 orders. Emirates, Qatar, Etihad, Singapore, Lufthansa and possibly more for BA. ??? Did you forget the word "not" in your sentence? Airbus said they are "fighting" to get as many orders as deliveries.

Perhaps goosebayguy thinks that there may be a big Emirates order + small Qatar/Etihad orders waiting to be announced at the Dubai air show. Or perhaps he's just one hell of an optimist.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 4): Does anybody see the risk that the A 389 will become the A 346 of the A 380-family? Wouldn’t it be better to focus on developing an advanced version of the A 388?

The interesting question is how much more revenue such a development will create relative to the investment needed. The 772L didn't sell like hotcakes: however, it might have been relatively cheap for Boeing to offer - and relative to that even the few sales might have made the project a good investment.

The same will be the case for the 389. Perhaps it could generate a few sales that would not have been made if only the 388 was on offer. Perhaps Airbus will make even more money on a 389 frame than on a 388 frame. Selling a few 389s might be more lucrative than selling the same number of 388s. Remember aircrafts are sold in a competitive environment where price is set relative to the revenue airlines can generate flying them and not relative to their price of production!

There's another worrying trend developing. If you google 'Airbus A380 deferred orders' you'll find that a lot of airlines are 'postponing' deliveries; ten by the leasing guys, ILFC; up to ten by Qatar; six from Virgin Atlantic; and a couple by Qantas. I checked up on the B748, no similar trend appearing there yet; but Boeing only have a handful of orders for it anyway.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7): There's another worrying trend developing. If you google 'Airbus A380 deferred orders' you'll find that a lot of airlines are 'postponing' deliveries; ten by the leasing guys, ILFC; up to ten by Qatar; six from Virgin Atlantic; and a couple by Qantas. I checked up on the B748, no similar trend appearing there yet; but Boeing only have a handful of orders for it anyway.

QANTAS is because they want to rein in capital expenditure, as I remember it. Apart from Virgin which I imagine will probably end up using their A380 deposits for A350's, I think the other airlines 'postponing' (as you write it) deliveries are actually postponing deliveries. My guess: due to market conditions.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7): There's another worrying trend developing. If you google 'Airbus A380 deferred orders' you'll find that a lot of airlines are 'postponing' deliveries; ten by the leasing guys, ILFC; up to ten by Qatar; six from Virgin Atlantic; and a couple by Qantas. I checked up on the B748, no similar trend appearing there yet; but Boeing only have a handful of orders for it anyway.

The deferrals you mention are spaced out over an 8 year period, so I would hardly call it a developing trend. I also believe the ILFC order was cancelled over 2 years ago - so yeah this seems like a very current development.

And the reason you can't see airlines doing the same with the 748i is because it only has 4 customers so it would be incredibly hard for 5 of them to pros-pone orders wouldn't it? Although I'm sure LH wished they had given the amount of re-work required on the frames to bring them to the promised specification.

[Edited 2013-09-24 03:38:41]

Despite the "worrying trend" the QR order seems to be doing ok!

http://www.qatarairways.com/english_...essrelease_130918-a380-test-flight

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7): There's another worrying trend developing.

Why is it worrying you? I get the impression from all of your 'the A380 is dead' posts that you want the A380 to be a failure.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7): If you google 'Airbus A380 deferred orders' you'll find that a lot of airlines are 'postponing' deliveries

And if you do an unbiased google search for deferrals of other aircraft types, you'll find that the order books of just about every aircraft type in history have suffered from cancellations and deferrals at some point. Airlines place orders based on their best guesses of what the market is going to be doing in the future, and then adjust those orders as they get closer, based on what is actually happening in the market. During a downturn, some orders are deferred and some are cancelled. Other causes can be mergers, changing competition, regulatory changes, terrorist events, etc. etc. It's just basic market forces.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7): I checked up on the B748, no similar trend appearing there yet

Given the extremely low number of orders on the book, and how recently those orders were placed, this should not really be a surprise to anyone.

Quoting Speedbored (Reply 11): Given the extremely low number of orders on the book, and how recently those orders were placed, this should not really be a surprise to anyone.

Isn't that what I went on to say in my post, Speedbored? 'Only a handful of orders?'  

[Edited 2013-09-24 03:37:16]

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7): I checked up on the B748, no similar trend appearing there yet

There is only one perfectly safe strategy to avoid deferrals and cancellations: no orders  

ILFC doesn't have any A380s on order.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7): I checked up on the B748, no similar trend appearing there yet; but Boeing only have a handful of orders for it anyway.

Try "747 desert storage".

Quoting art (Reply 8): QANTAS is because they want to rein in capital expenditure, as I remember it. Apart from Virgin which I imagine will probably end up using their A380 deposits for A350's, I think the other airlines 'postponing' (as you write it) deliveries are actually postponing deliveries. My guess: due to market conditions.

There are 17 orders that will probably never see the light of the day.

Hong Kong Airlines - 10 each
Kingfisher - 5 each
Air Austral - 2 each

On top of this we have the order from Virgin Atlantic for six aircraft.

SO of the 157 outstanding orders (as of the 1 July 2013), 23 of them are in the question mark category.

Market conditions pose a big if and as others have stated once there is a turn-around more orders from the established A380 operators could come in. I suspect there is only a small window for this to happen as a 777X poses a real alternative to the A380 on a trip cost, capacity and economics basis and as such is one of the alternatives that poses even more of a competitive threat than what it does today.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7): I checked up on the B748, no similar trend appearing there yet; but Boeing only have a handful of orders for it anyway.

No, Boeing is just flying them straight into storage at Marana. Four times so far.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 16): No, Boeing is just flying them straight into storage at Marana. Four times so far.

These aircraft are freighters.

There is very clear evidence that the GFC combined with the belly space now available in aircraft like the 777-300ER and other economic factors has resulted in a fundamental shift in the need for very large freighters resulting in an oversupply situation.

I read recently that the percentage of freighters (compared to total aircraft) has decreased since the start of the GFC and is projected to decrease into the near future.

This is a very different situation to commercial aeroplanes where the market for passenger aircraft is consistently growing.

Quoting travelhound (Reply 17): These aircraft are freighters.

They're still deferrals of a Very Large Aircraft family.

And to be sure if the A380-800F had entered production and it was seeing deferrals, that would be raised as further proof of how the A380 was a program nobody wanted.  

[Edited 2013-09-24 07:13:43]

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 4): On a side note: I find it actually amazing that Airbus’ flagship is still flying with these old-fashioned wingtip-fences. If Boeing really implements the folding wingtips I really hope the will “brake the ice” and Airbus will follow with the A 380 and will overcome the 80m-restriction (and yes, I know, the they have limited development resources and usually they do not discuss their next projects with my sugggestions…

These old-fashioned wingtip fences are a compromise. The wing Airbus originally wanted on the A380 would have a wingspan of about 84 meters. Thus exceeding ICAO category F dimensions which call for a box of 80 meters by 80 meters.

Folding wing tips could very well also be seen on a further developed A380. And might even take the wingspan to almost 90 meters or so.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 4): Holy cow, what have I done!!!

You asked for it.    .

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 14): Try "747 desert storage".

   

Quoting scbriml (Reply 16): No, Boeing is just flying them straight into storage at Marana. Four times so far.

That I did not know.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 18): They're still deferrals of a Very Large Aircraft family.

Yes, they are. And it is not a good trend to see that happen.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 16): No, Boeing is just flying them straight into storage at Marana. Four times so far.

I believe 2 have been returned to Everett for delivery.. and somewhere I thought one was sent there by the Customer after delivery..

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 14): Try "747 desert storage".

I got a kick out of this.

New article came out today

"Airbus has a "couple" of A380 superjumbo production slots available for existing customers at the end of 2015, its sales chief said on Tuesday."
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/airbus...oduction-slots-2015-102238270.html

Mostly old news as I think we have known about this for a while. It could have been there before but this is the first I have noticed where the quote now specifies 'existing customers' acknowledging the lead time. Think these slots will go to EK on the cheap, sold to another customer, white tails, or production people get a month long vacation  

tortugamon

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 21): It could have been there before but this is the first I have noticed where the quote now specifies 'existing customers' acknowledging the lead time.

Perhaps these slots need to be filled by an existing customer with an existing configuration in order to be usable as their may be insufficient lead-time to accommodate a new customer with a new configuration that needs to be validated and that would see a slower outfitting time as XFW is not already familiar with outfitting such a configuration.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 22):

Right, and they have acknowledged that not only does it have to be a current customer but the customer can't ask for material changes to their configuration as well.

Hope they will fill the slots. Flying is better with more A380s out there.

tortugamon

Quoting kanban (Reply 20): I believe 2 have been returned to Everett for delivery.. and somewhere I thought one was sent there by the Customer after delivery..

Indeed. But the customer had deferred delivery, which was the point of the original poster.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 21): I got a kick out of this.

These are the same slots from the Paris air show. Maybe Lufthansa will take them, they want 2 more A380s.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 22): Perhaps these slots need to be filled by an existing customer with an existing configuration in order to be usable as their may be insufficient lead-time to accommodate a new customer with a new configuration that needs to be validated and that would see a slower outfitting time as XFW is not already familiar with outfitting such a configuration.

Unless they become VIP birds so could delivered as R̶e̶d̶,̶ ̶W̶h̶i̶t̶e̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶B̶l̶u̶e̶ "Green" frames.  

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 4): But by extending the capacity of the A388 they move up in that pyramid of potential aircraft orders, where the market might be even smaller. The only justification I colud imagine is that only an A 389 is capable of replacing two 77Ws on a given route and operators such as LH, AF and EK have already officially announced their interest in a larger version.

That is why it is more likely that Airbus will go for a small increase in capacity when the A380 is refreshed. Think 747-200 to 747-300/400, or even the 77W to 777-9.

The incremental capacity is just another lever to make the aircraft more attractive on a per seat basis.

Quoting incitatus (Reply 26): The incremental capacity is just another lever to make the aircraft more attractive on a per seat basis.

In particular when the 800 is designed with a 900 in mind.

Aviation Daily is reporting the following regarding the status of the A380 order book:

- Lufthansa has cancelled orders for 3, reducing their orders from 17 to 14. (747-8i orders were also reduced from 20 to 19.)
- Other orders listed as doubtful are Virgin Atlantic (6), Kingfisher (5), Air Austral (2), Hong King Airlines (10).
- Overall A380 order book now stands at 259 including the above.

The article says that although the reduction is small, it does send a strong message to the market that Lufthansa believes the future lies towards smaller widebodies.

Quoting glbltrvlr (Reply 28): The article says that although the reduction is small, it does send a strong message to the market that Lufthansa believes the future lies towards smaller widebodies.

To cancel rather than defer is quite dramatic. Perhaps LH cannot see how to use them profitably in the short-medium terrn.

Quoting art (Reply 29): To cancel rather than defer is quite dramatic. Perhaps LH cannot see how to use them profitably in the short-medium terrn.

Per an article in Bloomberg, LH have stated the reason they cancelled them is that they wish to be more conservative with their fleet growth then they were a few years back.

They still appear to be fully committed to taking the remainder of their 747-8 order (sans the one frame they cancelled earlier), so I do not believe it is a case of LH shying away from the VLA. Instead, I believe they feel the revised numbers for both VLAs are sufficient to meet their needs.

[Edited 2013-10-05 14:03:59]

the guy/girl posting on the site
http://www.lh-taufnamen.de/lufthansa/

seems to be extremely knowledgeable about LH. as the frames are gone from the list there, this is essentially an official confirmation of the cancellation.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30): LH have stated the reason they cancelled them is that they wish to be more conservative with their fleet growth then they were a few years back.

Not just a few years back, they intended to order two more in the beginning of the year.

If we take the 747/380 as the only components of the fleet one sees one thing, if we look at their 777/350 commitments a different picture is emerging..

EK are scheduled to take delivery of 53 A380's between now and 2017. These aircraft are all stated for growth. In addition to the A380's EK still have 62 unfilled orders for the 777. Even though some of these 777's are stated for replacement of older aircraft we still have an airline planning to increase the size of its fleet by more than 100 aircraft in the next five years. To put this into perspective British Airways currently operates a fleet of 135 wide body aircraft.

Practically, I can't see how this is possible. We are talking 25-35% of the Heathrow airport operation being added to Dubai. These are unbelievable numbers.

Quoting travelhound (Reply 34): Practically, I can't see how this is possible. We are talking 25-35% of the Heathrow airport operation being added to Dubai. These are unbelievable numbers.

Agree that it seems far-fetched on the face of it, but Heathrow handled 70 million passengers last year; and Dubai handled 58 million. What's more, Emirates claim that passenger numbers are increasing by 12% per year. A lot of it longhaul, too. Scroll down a bit - to "Terminals, airlines and destinations" - and you'll see the incredible number of destinations that Emirates and FlyDubai are already serving:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai_International_Airport

Talk about 'the crossroads of the world'..............

[Edited 2013-10-05 20:53:12]

Quoting travelhound (Reply 34): Practically, I can't see how this is possible. We are talking 25-35% of the Heathrow airport operation being added to Dubai. These are unbelievable numbers.

Dubai doesn't have the airport expansion issues London does.

Quoting glbltrvlr (Reply 28): The article says that although the reduction is small, it does send a strong message to the market that Lufthansa believes the future lies towards smaller widebodies.

That isnt so, as the combined A380/748 seatcount will still be considerably larger than the 744 fleet it replaces.
It is nevertheless a negative surprise I (and I guess almost everyone else here) would have never expected.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30): They still appear to be fully committed to taking the remainder of their 747-8 order (sans the one frame they cancelled earlier), so I do not believe it is a case of LH shying away from the VLA. Instead, I believe they feel the revised numbers for both VLAs are sufficient to meet their needs.

Right.

[Edited 2013-10-06 13:23:11 by ManuCH]

Quoting na (Reply 38): Its time for Airbus to think about an improved A380 version for introduction in 2020

Airbus (and Boeing, for that matter) will know what their customers are saying. And my guess is that most of them see the future as largely 'big twins,' not jumbos.

However, Emirates appears to be an 'exception to the rule,' so far...........

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 4): 1.) A 389 vs. A 380-NEO or NG or Adv.. Many predict that in this VLA-chess-game, Airbus will be pushed by Boeing’s 77X to develop the A 389. But by extending the capacity of the A388 they move up in that pyramid of potential aircraft orders, where the market might be even smaller. The only justification I colud imagine is that only an A 389 is capable of replacing two 77Ws on a given route and operators such as LH, AF and EK have already officially announced their interest in a larger version. Does anybody see the risk that the A 389 will become the A 346 of the A 380-family? Wouldn’t it be better to focus on developing an advanced version of the A 388?

I don't see the 389 going the 346 route, namely because I do not see it happening at all until there have been some very fundamental shifts in the market.

For the 380, the best bet is on a continuing PIP & IGW program basis, as is the case for the 330s.

The biggest problem facing the 389 is the fact that the 388s in service are already not being used to their fullest capacity. Airbus did go out and get them certified for a greater lower deck seating cross section, as I recall, but are there any plans to put this into effect? I'm sure that will happen eventually (well, at least well before any 389s are made), but the fact that most operators are in the 400 - 500 seat range strongly suggests that the 380 isn't being looked at as a super massive people hauler, so much as a large capacity premium traffic and trunk route vehicle.

The difference between now and a market that wants 389s is that for the 389 to happen, there has to be justification for the not trivial increase in metal to carry more PAX at a time. And until that need supercedes what the 388 is already capable of, I have a very hard time imagining any profit based airline wanting to absorb the large increase in operational and (likely) acquisition costs involved.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 4): On a side note: I find it actually amazing that Airbus’ flagship is still flying with these old-fashioned wingtip-fences. If Boeing really implements the folding wingtips I really hope the will “brake the ice” and Airbus will follow with the A 380 and will overcome the 80m-restriction (and yes, I know, the they have limited development resources and usually they do not discuss their next projects with my sugggestions…

Well, if Boeing can make folding tips for the 778/9, there's no reason Airbus couldn't develop these for the 380. There is, after all, quite a large bit of wing outboard of the ailerons, so engineering this should be somewhat straightforward.

But...

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 19): Folding wing tips could very well also be seen on a further developed A380. And might even take the wingspan to almost 90 meters or so.

Agreed that it is possible. And would be even better looking than the current wing. However...
From what I understand, the current wing was designed with the 389, & 38H already in mind. And if you ever see one A380 from behind, and one from the side at the same time (Seriously, I love working at LAX sometimes,   ), you can see that the span as already quite a bit longer than the fuselage length as it is. So the question would be do they really need to go to 90 meters?

Again, I have no doubt they would do an extension with folding tips if they wanted/needed to. I'm just not convinced it's necessary.

Quoting na (Reply 38): Its time for Airbus to think about an improved A380 version for introduction in 2020 which again offers considerably better economics than the biggest new twinjets then available.

Sure. But given how involved the Engine mfrs are, and that there are IGWs getting ready to fly this year, would we really need to wait all the way to 2020? That seems like a long time to me. OTOH, what (short of putting closer to the amount of seats it can already actually take) can be done to improve the airframe aside from power plant upgrades? The thing that a lot of folks don't necessarily realize is that the 380 is already a very advanced plane as it is.

How much weight could be taken about of the 380, some of which was designed with the 390 in mind? And when and how much would it cost to put in a much newer engine? At a certain improvement of CASM over the new 777s and 350s the case for buying it could become more compelling. The crux is how much that improvement would cost.

Airbus believed that a great aircraft would sell by its own merits.... How naive... airlines look at what capacity they need first.

Quoting Aither (Reply 42): Airbus believed that a great aircraft would sell by its own merits

Rubbish. Airbus believed in major hub to hub operations and operations into ever more congested, slot restricted points of departure and arrival.

It is way, way too early to judge whether they made the right decision.

My money is on them having got it right, not with the A380 and future derivatives in isolation, but with their complete wide body line-up.

Let's come back to this in 2020.  

Rgds

Quoting blueshamu330s (Reply 42): Airbus believed in major hub to hub operations and operations into ever more congested, slot restricted points of departure and arrival.

Quoting DarkSnowyNight (Reply 39): The biggest problem facing the 389 is the fact that the 388s in service are already not being used to their fullest capacity. Airbus did go out and get them certified for a greater lower deck seating cross section, as I recall, but are there any plans to put this into effect? I'm sure that will happen eventually (well, at least well before any 389s are made), but the fact that most operators are in the 400 - 500 seat range strongly suggests that the 380 isn't being looked at as a super massive people hauler, so much as a large capacity premium traffic and trunk route vehicle.

Quoting blueshamu330s (Reply 42): My money is on them having got it right, not with the A380 and future derivatives in isolation, but with their complete wide body line-up. Let's come back to this in 2020.

If we see airlines adding seats to their A380's the hub to hub people mover will come to fruition.

Quoting DarkSnowyNight (Reply 39): The biggest problem facing the 389 is the fact that the 388s in service are already not being used to their fullest capacity.

And the two airlines that are using their A380-800s at "fullest capacity" - LH and AF - don't operate out of slot-constrained hubs.

Even A380-800 poster child BA @ LHR is going (relatively) low-density with their frames and replacing a fair bit of their 747-400s with smaller frames, not larger.

Quoting Aither (Reply 41): How naive... airlines look at what capacity they need first.

I wonder if all (or any) of them think that first? After all, the priority for the majority of airlines must be to make a profit?

Turning things on their head a bit, the cost difference (in terms of fuel, maintenance, etc.) between only two (admittedly-larger) engines instead of four must be pretty large (I'd guess of the order of 30% or so)?

So it could be that the airlines that are looking at ordering B777s/A350s are just thinking in terms of boarding around 400 passengers in 'big twins' instead of around 500 in jumbos; lowering costs per head, and therefore generating better profits? After all, the majority of airlines aren't seeking to carry more passengers than anyone else - they're just trying to stay in (profitable) business?

[Edited 2013-10-06 22:21:38]

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 45): Turning things on their head a bit, the cost difference (in terms of fuel, maintenance, etc.) between only two (admittedly-larger) engines instead of four must be pretty large (I'd guess of the order of 30% or so?

30%, how do you get to that number?

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 45): After all, the majority of airlines aren't seeking to carry more passengers than anyone else - they're just trying to stay in (profitable) business?

Not aware they look at just one parameter. A key element of staying profitable is ensure you are a significant player in the segments you participate. Leaving large numbers of passengers behind is an invitation for competitors to grow stronger at your cost. Makes it very hard to stay profitable.

Quoting cmf (Reply 46): 30%, how do you get to that number?

As I said, just a guess, cmf. But with only two engines instead of four, the maintenance/fuel costs surely HAVE to be lower?

[Edited 2013-10-06 22:00:49]

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 47): the maintenance/fuel costs surely HAVE to be lower?

On a passenger-km basis, or in absolute terms? I imagine the answer might be significantly different, depending on which way you spin the numbers.

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 48): On a passenger-km basis, or in absolute terms?

Short answer is, WingedMigrator, none of us part-time amateurs know yet.   But the 'broad' answer is, if my 30% estimate is right, flying 400 people in a big twin will be more profitable than flying 500 (20% more) passengers in a jumbo?

[Edited 2013-10-06 22:41:18]