It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Emirates wants 10 year production guarantee before it commits to more A380's

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2017 @ 10:19 PM
link   
State owned Emirates is putting pressure on Airbus to commit to keeping the A380 line open for ten more years in order to secure more orders from them. This comes on the heels of Emirates announcing a purchase of 40 787's for its thin long haul routes. Emirates has a ton of leverage here because they are basically the sole customer at this point of the A380. On the flip side Airbus seems to really want to walk away and end this chapter in its history and focus resources elsewhere.

Its not over yet and both sides are still talking, but without another order from Emirates, the A380 is most likely going to join the 747 (or not as there is no freighter version) as a relic of the past.

www.bloomberg.com...
www.reuters.com...




posted on Nov, 14 2017 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

The A380 is dead. Qantas has found that they can run 2 787-10s, with a total of 13 fewer seats than a single A380 has, over the same distance, for a lower seat cost. With the exception of Emirates, there are very few operators that are happy with the economics of the A380.



posted on Nov, 15 2017 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: FredT

The A380 is dead. Qantas has found that they can run 2 787-10s, with a total of 13 fewer seats than a single A380 has, over the same distance, for a lower seat cost. With the exception of Emirates, there are very few operators that are happy with the economics of the A380.


Yeah I read that tidbit from the Qantas CEO. Plus it gives them flexibility to send the 787 elsewhere with lower load factors if needed. Only busy slot limited airports would allow an airline to really benefit from it



posted on Nov, 15 2017 @ 01:32 AM
link   
What could go wrong with an A380M re-fueller/bomb truck for the new European Airfarce, you know just like the other Military Airbus.

Trump should have gone A380 for the next presidential flying palace, lush as f**k.
edit on 15 11 2017 by Forensick because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2017 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Maybe team up and turn them into Antanov heavy freight transports.



posted on Nov, 15 2017 @ 04:42 AM
link   
The A380 is a great example of how you can build a great plane but a wrong one. If only it came out a decade earlier, it would have likely been a roaring success. Will be interesting to see if Airbus commits though...and besides, its the EU...if it all goes tits up, there will be a government bailout in one form or another...



posted on Nov, 15 2017 @ 06:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Borys
If only it came out a decade earlier, it would have likely been a roaring success.


I just don't see it, with the ETOPs handwriting already on the wall airlines were looking at twin engine ultra-long range aircraft.

If I recall correctly one Airbus executive said it came out a decade too early.




edit on 15-11-2017 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn



posted on Nov, 15 2017 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
If I recall correctly one Airbus executive said it came out a decade too early.


They are still clinging to their flawed model that hub and spoke travel would be the future and crapped the bed.

I also believe they would have built it anyway as I firmly believe that 1) it was a prestige project, 2) it was nothing more than an elaborate EU jobs programs, 3) Success or failure it was going to be paid by the EU taxpayers (Waynos and have gone back and forth over the years on the subsidies issue) etc.



posted on Nov, 15 2017 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackfinger
Maybe team up and turn them into Antanov heavy freight transports.


They walked away from the freighter version, and not knowing the structure, I'm not sure how much cargo could be carried on the second deck.

The 747F's have the advantage of the hinged nose as well.



posted on Nov, 15 2017 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
I also believe they would have built it anyway as I firmly believe that 1) it was a prestige project, 2) it was nothing more than an elaborate EU jobs programs, 3) Success or failure it was going to be paid by the EU taxpayers (Waynos and have gone back and forth over the years on the subsidies issue) etc.


I don't disagree with any of those with the vanity aspect being a major one.



posted on Nov, 16 2017 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Working at BAES and buying parts for it we were never told or hinted it was a vanity project, talk at the time was it was going to be the future of long haul. Not naive to think that management told us that for engagement but what if they redesigned the wings and took on some new engine technology to release a A380B that was much more efficient?

It might get a resurgence?

I travelled business class in both A380m and 747 and apart from the initial excitement of the new airbus there we no difference in comfort. In fact the A380 entertainment was broken ON MY SEAT so we were given $200 DOLARS OF DUTY FREE.

I do think there is an oppportunity to improve it though to make its cost per customer more lucrative and new wings and engines are an easy fix, even could be retrofitted if done right,



posted on Nov, 16 2017 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Forensick
Working at BAES and buying parts for it we were never told or hinted it was a vanity project, talk at the time was it was going to be the future of long haul. Not naive to think that management told us that for engagement but what if they redesigned the wings and took on some new engine technology to release a A380B that was much more efficient?



It's not that the engines are inefficient, it's that there's 4 of them and the it's the maintenance factors revolving around servicing 4 engine aircraft.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Forensick

The problem is that the A380 really only appeals to one airline: Emirates which has a geographical location and route structure that is tailored to the A380. But this order and the fact that it has committed to 150 of the 777-9's shows there are limits to the model.

With ONE customer, there is no way Airbus can commit the $$$ and resources to supply at most 100-200 planes. No one wants the A380. Singapore let their first batch go rather, Malaysia finding no buyers converted there to 700 seat cattle cars to charter for religious pilgrimages. We are going to start seeing them parked in the Mojave soon.

There have been no new orders for the A380 since Emirates last order 5 years ago. Also couple that with almost 50 of their order book are for airlines that are bankrupt OR have said they will not be taking them (virgin)

Airbus should simply walk away from this loss..........



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
There have been no new orders for the A380 since Emirates last order 5 years ago.


I didn't even realize they were milking it for that long. While I was sad to see the 747 passenger line basically going dark they are at least still building some freighter variants while I think the 380 is doomed to be one of the biggest aircraft busts in history.




edit on 20-11-2017 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 04:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

You got a link for that Qantas claim?



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 04:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

You got a link for that Qantas claim?
edit on 21-11-2017 by Gurumuka because: Editing



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Gurumuka


And the differences in economics between the Dreamliner and Qantas' previous flagship, the Airbus A380 Superjumbo are stark.

According to Joyce, he can fly two 236-seat Dreamliners for less than the cost of a single 486-seat A380, which entered the Qantas fleet in 2008.

"If we were to fly two 787s tail-to-tail, the per-seat cost would be less than the A380," the Qantas CEO said.

www.businessinsider.com...



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gurumuka
a reply to: Zaphod58

You got a link for that Qantas claim?


As Zaphod noted above plus look at it from a carrier standpoint:

Alot of these airlines have seasonal heavy routes that you may not need the capacity of an A380 in the off season and flying a smaller twin gives you more flexibility with route scheduling dispatch etc.

Emirates as I said above is unique in that they are all long hual, and the vast majority of their routes are to those types of cities that have slot limited airports (Think Heathrow, De Gaulle, JFK etc.) If the A380 made sence for everybody else they would have bought more of them

Also many of us are willing to pay a bit more to fly point to point than hub and spoke



posted on Nov, 22 2017 @ 04:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Thanks for that, had not seen that one. A380 will go the way of the dodo!



posted on Nov, 23 2017 @ 04:18 PM
link   



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join