Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
cloudboy wrote:I am wondering if a LCC carrier could make the A380 work on shorter routes between really high demand markets. I am thinking the NYC>LAX market, the JFK>London, and maybe the London to Miami markets.
Rajahdhani wrote:Can someone explain as well, why the cost of retro-fitting these aircraft (if an operator even wished to remove premium cabins as is, or retrofit them to other configurations/space)? Was the issue ever fixed, and/or have any A380 operators undergone major cabin changes to their A380s that I can use an example for furthering my research?
Rajahdhani wrote:Can someone explain as well, why the cost of retro-fitting these aircraft (if an operator even wished to remove premium cabins as is, or retrofit them to other configurations/space)? Was the issue ever fixed, and/or have any A380 operators undergone major cabin changes to their A380s that I can use an example for furthering my research?
cloudboy wrote:I am wondering if a LCC carrier could make the A380 work on shorter routes between really high demand markets.
Point to Point is the rage in the LCC market right now, but a solid hub and spoke model could conceivably concentrate enough passengers to fill such an aircraft on a couple of routes. If you could bring the cost down low enough, this might convince leisure travelers to put up with a layover if they can get a much cheaper flight.
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/reports/all-nippon-airways-acquisition-of-skymark-and-its-a380s-would-be-difficult-but-with-upside-for-both-184574
"Under the proposal, ANA would take Skymark's A380s and deploy them in the domestic Japanese market in a high-density configuration. Skymark would retain its own brand and operation, so the cooperation would extend beyond simple codesharing but stop short of a merger, which for various reasons is out of the question. ANA has similar but smaller partnerships with two other domestic carriers, Air Do and StarFlyer.".
https://www.businessinsider.com/why-airlines-are-falling-back-in-love-with-airbus-a380-2021-10#on-october-15-all-nippon-airways-took-delivery-of-its-third-and-final-a380-from-airbuss-production-line-in-toulouse-france-the-japanese-carrier-had-planned-to-use-the-aircraft-to-fly-solely-between-tokyo-and-honolulu-hawaii-before-the-pandemic-hit-17
"On October 15, All Nippon Airways took delivery of its third and final A380 from Airbus's production line in Toulouse, France. The Japanese carrier had planned to use the aircraft to fly solely between Tokyo and Honolulu, Hawaii before the pandemic hit.".
https://www.businessinsider.com/why-airlines-are-falling-back-in-love-with-airbus-a380-2021-10#one-airline-that-never-gave-up-on-the-a380-even-during-the-worst-of-the-pandemic-is-china-southern-airlines-from-guangzhou-china-the-a380-flew-to-global-destinations-such-as-los-angeles-sydney-tokyo-paris-london-and-amsterdam-netherlands-36
"One airline that never gave up on the A380, even during the worst of the pandemic, is China Southern Airlines. From Guangzhou, China, the A380 flew to global destinations such as Los Angeles, Sydney, Tokyo, Paris, London, and Amsterdam, Netherlands.".
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/news/en/2016/02/asia-pacific-is-a-key-a380-market-today-and-for-the-future.html
The A380 has literally changed the shape of air transportation in Asia-Pacific, and will continue to play an important role as this region’s dynamic passenger traffic develops during the years to come. Asia-Pacific is a major “home” for the A380: almost half of the global customer base for Airbus’ 21st century flagship jetliner is located there, while all of the other world’s operators utilise A380s on routes to destinations in the area.
“While airline passenger traffic doubles worldwide every 15 years, such a doubling occurs each 10 years in Asia – so A380’s market importance will continue as airlines respond to the growing demand,” explained David Dufrenois, head of Airbus’ A380 Market Development Platform.
Rajahdhani wrote:Can someone explain as well, why the cost of retro-fitting these aircraft (if an operator even wished to remove premium cabins as is, or retrofit them to other configurations/space)?
Charles Champion, Head of the A380 Programme and recently appointed Airbus Chief Operating Officer as well, sums up progress to date as follows. “We had feared some surprises that did not occur. There have not been any big problems, but many small ones, and there won't be any showstoppers. However, we did misjudge the amount of work involved on the wiring. The scale of individual customer special requirements surprised us. Now we are having to do the wiring with all the cable harnesses for many different customer versions in parallel. Emirates is even getting two variants. It affects not just the wires but also their fastenings, and hence the structure. Because of that, at the beginning we had sections in final assembly without the full system equipment for the cabin.”
(Champion) admitted Airbus hadn't expected the amount of customisation sought by airlines, which caused delays in production as each fuselage layout uses unique wiring harnesses and hardpoints for mounting cabin items. "We underestimated the volume of customisation," said Champion. "Where we were taken by surprise is the amount of engineering hours required to deliver the technical verification sheets. We were not able to provide design inputs to sub-contractors to do the harnesses." This resulted in fuselage sections being delivered to the final assembly line before cabin interfaces and wiring harnesses had been installed, requiring out-of-sequence rectification work.
Rajahdhani wrote:Was the issue ever fixed, and/or have any A380 operators undergone major cabin changes to their A380s that I can use an example for furthering my research?
Rajahdhani wrote:In defining shorter, and high demand - the idea of Japan came to mind instantly.
Domestically, the aircraft would have been a decent capacity replacement for 747D (Domestic)
Rajahdhani wrote:Having those A380s coming directly from Airbus, ANA could have arranged them in the described "domestic Japanese market in a high-density configuration,".
That said, when it came time it - ANA deployed them differently...to Hawaii (jokingly, I guess - domestic...).
Rajahdhani wrote:...and not at all meaning to dismiss the other A380 operators in the region, but well, this is the currently most 'successfully' operating A380 operator (and please, if I am incorrect, please kindly correct below) in the region, at the admittedly dynamically changing times currently.
cloudboy wrote:There seems to be a lot of A380 on the market, or at least available if anyone would even consider buying one. In an all coach configuration, I believe it can carry over 800 passengers, though I am not sure it could get that kind of certification.
I am wondering if a LCC carrier could make the A380 work on shorter routes between really high demand markets. I am thinking the NYC>LAX market, the JFK>London, and maybe the London to Miami markets. I know it has four engines, but considering the number of passengers it can carry, that would be fewer engines than the multiple aircraft you would need to carry that load with other aircraft. And, you need fewer flight crew, fewer ground support personnel, and fewer gates/gate occupancy. Point to Point is the rage in the LCC market right now, but a solid hub and spoke model could conceivably concentrate enough passengers to fill such an aircraft on a couple of routes. If you could bring the cost down low enough, this might convince leisure travelers to put up with a layover if they can get a much cheaper flight.
ScottB wrote:Rajahdhani wrote:In defining shorter, and high demand - the idea of Japan came to mind instantly.
Domestically, the aircraft would have been a decent capacity replacement for 747D (Domestic)
Except this would not have worked for a number of key reasons. As the Shinkansen network has grown, the demand for domestic air travel in Japan has declined -- thus the 747-400Ds were ultimately replaced with smaller aircraft. Contributing to this has been a declining population and an economy which has suffered through three decades or so of malaise. And, importantly, a high-volume airborne people-mover won't work without access to HND, where the A380 is prohibited.Rajahdhani wrote:Having those A380s coming directly from Airbus, ANA could have arranged them in the described "domestic Japanese market in a high-density configuration,".
That said, when it came time it - ANA deployed them differently...to Hawaii (jokingly, I guess - domestic...).
NH didn't order A380s because they needed them. The A380s were the price they paid to keep Skymark (and its slots/operations at HND) out of Delta's hands.Rajahdhani wrote:...and not at all meaning to dismiss the other A380 operators in the region, but well, this is the currently most 'successfully' operating A380 operator (and please, if I am incorrect, please kindly correct below) in the region, at the admittedly dynamically changing times currently.
Eh, the Big 3 Chinese airlines don't entirely operate based on commercial considerations. With the current border restrictions I doubt CZ can even fill an A330 from any foreign market to CAN.
cloudboy wrote:There seems to be a lot of A380 on the market, or at least available if anyone would even consider buying one. In an all coach configuration, I believe it can carry over 800 passengers, though I am not sure it could get that kind of certification.
I am wondering if a LCC carrier could make the A380 work on shorter routes between really high demand markets. I am thinking the NYC>LAX market, the JFK>London, and maybe the London to Miami markets. I know it has four engines, but considering the number of passengers it can carry, that would be fewer engines than the multiple aircraft you would need to carry that load with other aircraft. And, you need fewer flight crew, fewer ground support personnel, and fewer gates/gate occupancy. Point to Point is the rage in the LCC market right now, but a solid hub and spoke model could conceivably concentrate enough passengers to fill such an aircraft on a couple of routes. If you could bring the cost down low enough, this might convince leisure travelers to put up with a layover if they can get a much cheaper flight.
TC957 wrote:The lo-cost business model works when ground turnaround times are kept really low....something you can't do with deplaning and boarding 800-odd pax on an A380.