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: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
The A380 is dying a slow death.


Well if you a niche product and one customer its kind of hard to dictate terms




posted on Nov, 23 2017 @ 07:45 PM
link   
And here's an interesting twist in the A380 saga.
edit on 11/23/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I would like to know which bank or finance company is going to go against just about everyone else and take a punt with this...



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
And here's an interesting twist in the A380 saga.


That is interesting to say the least. Kind of like a Ryan Air concept perhaps.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Borys
a reply to: Zaphod58

I would like to know which bank or finance company is going to go against just about everyone else and take a punt with this...


They already did back when the A380 had a rosier future. They have 20 of them If I recall all waiting to go but no airline wants to wet least them.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Well, I guess if you mistakenly bought a couple billion dollars worth of aircraft noone wants to lease, you have to do something. On the other hand, I can't imagine there is enough overflow out there or AirBnB passengers to make this a winning financial proposition. Most carriers already have arrangements with other carriers for this sort of thing, and you'd have to have a lot of people going to a particular hub to make it worth the while to make a flight. What am I missing?



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

I think they re looking at charter vacations etc. Years ago on the west coast we had a wholesale vacation company called Sun trips. They were cheap in part because they used American Trans Air who was charter airline. They bought out the plane then resold the tickets as part of the vacation package. We took several trips in their L-1011's to Hawaii

Malaysian Airlines has park their A380 and now use them as charter aircraft for religious pilgrimages



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 09:40 PM
link   
I'm just struggling to see an A380's worth of demand to a single location via AirBnB. It's the same economic question faced by everyone. Operation costs for the 380 are too high to sustain low-cost half-empty flights. And they're starting from scratch, employing thousands of people, investing millions and millions for operations, insurance, training, etc to generate competitive or unserviced flights in a crowded industry as often enough as they manage to mostly fill a plane. It looks like it could easily go sideways financially worse than just parting them out or parking them and hoping for a change in market conditions. This is like refusing to take a bad loss in Vegas, so you just start trying to bet "double or nothing" at roulette.



posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Ill be honest here, a lot of people have expressed a belief that the big twin is king and that the days of four engine aircraft have ended for good and we will shortly see the demise of the 747-8 and the A-380. Many have raised good points, some more than others but I believe they rest in flawed logic. The simple fact is an A-380 for example and within reason is no more expensive per seat kilometre to run than a comparable age 777 or A-330. The actual problem is making sure you dont have a stack of empty seats on a given sector that aren't paying the fuel costs, that has been the problem that some operators have struggled to deal with. Passengers love the A-380 and probably also the 748. What people are discounting is that the industry logic and planning is mostly half a step behind the future. People think that for example a 777-X will fill seats and slots, and up to a point they would be right. The problem is when they will need to fill more seats and slots than they have available, and that day/window is around 5-15 years from now. Many markets will continue to see double digit growth in that period, but the number of aircraft slots will not rise at a commensurate rate. The big twin has probably reached about as far as it can go with the larger 777-X sizes, which is around 400 seats. Step much beyond that to 500/600+ seats and you start to need a larger hull, specifically a twin decker in order to stay within a reasonable size (the 80m box rule for example), and the only way to make that happen with current or near future engine technology is with four of them. Even the 777-X is having to use the novel folding wing tip designs to build a wing that is efficient enough to build a seat cost business case. I dont believe we will ever see another trijet config as while it worked, there were certain deficiencies and problems that make it less efficient than four wing mounted motors, and obviously less efficient than a big twin.

Personally I think it obvious that the 747-8 is now dead. Boeing did too little, too late to the design to make it a viable proposition. It should have been re-winged and stretched in the late 90's as well as seeing some legacy systems upgraded or replaced. Had that happened as in the 747-500/600 concepts there could have been further upgrades introduced over the past 5 or so years, but it wasn't to be. Ironically if it had we may not have seen the A-380 developed. As for Toulouse's effort, I believe they are right to protect its manufacturing base. but They MUST be prepared to bight the bullet and offer some real NEO type upgrades to make it viable and attractive. These will include, cleaning up the wing and wing to body fairings, offering a stretch to finally offer the -900 version, activating the wing centre tank for increased fuel capacity, which naturally leads to a further increased growth weight (this will probably necessitate fitting the additional four braked wheels to what are currently the un-braked BWS(Body Wheel Steering) bogie's for which there is already provision). Reducing empty weight, and removing/replacing redundant and unreliable systems. And obviously upgrading the current engines. Do these things and you have an aircraft that can deliver a large number of passengers into slot constrained airports that are only going to increase in number in coming years. Governments cannot afford to keep building green fields airports, are limited in how far they can expand existing ones and wake turbulence means you will be physically constrained in how many movements per hour you can cycle through. There will be improvements in all these areas but not enough to deal with the growth rate of the next 20 years. And that is why large, four engined aircraft will be needed in the medium to long term future, because as good and efficient as they are big twins can only do so much.



posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian

Those are all solid points, but, the market place will also decide.

How people travel is vastly different these days. Its not just the efficiency's of twin versus larger quads.

It used to be that when you went to say France, you went to Paris and ventured here and there. Many like my self are avoiding the large cities like the plague and enjoying the charms of smaller areas.

Also, and I'm not alone, prefer direct flight and avoid the hub and spoke wherever possible.

The A380 and the 777X are marvels of production and technology, but modern airports are not. They are slightly improved and digitized version of decade old concepts. Most cannot handle the influxes of several 500+ planes at the same time without creating chaos in the terminals etc.



posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

That's a huge advantage the 737 has. It might not carry 450+ people, but some of the future Max plans include flying out of relatively tiny East Coast airports to Europe. That's going to drop the price of tickets for people enough to make it worthwhile for people to travel.

It's taking a lot longer than planned for, but the hub and spoke is dying.



posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
That's a huge advantage the 737 has. It might not carry 450+ people, but some of the future Max plans include flying out of relatively tiny East Coast airports to Europe. That's going to drop the price of tickets for people enough to make it worthwhile for people to travel.

It's taking a lot longer than planned for, but the hub and spoke is dying.


That's why I am hoping Stewart gets built up, the amount of slots that can potentially be used for TATL flights would be great for the area.



posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Norwegian was talking about bringing their Max flights into airports I've never even heard of before. Places that see 5-6 "large" aircraft flights a week and are served by CRJ sized aircraft normally. That would do wonders for ticket prices.



posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
That would do wonders for ticket prices.


I agree. Many of the smaller 'international' airports on the east coast probably haven't seen an international flight ever. They need to do something about the chronic delays into the NYC area's three airports and opening up slots elsewhere could help alleviate that issue.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Speaking of Stewart, an A380 diverted into t there because of the blizzard.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 06:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Speaking of Stewart, an A380 diverted into t there because of the blizzard.


That had to be interesting for the ground and terminal crews.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 06:27 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
No bigger deal than a 747 or 777 really. Only problem is if your airport doesn't have "aerobridge C" capability.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 06:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: thebozeian
No bigger deal than a 747 or 777 really. Only problem is if your airport doesn't have "aerobridge C" capability.


I can't recall the last time Stewart got anything larger than a paper plane.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 06:32 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Ok fair enough, then its a big deal. Sorry I'm jaded somewhat in dealing with them every day.




posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 06:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: thebozeian

Ok fair enough, then its a big deal. Sorry I'm jaded somewhat in dealing with them every day.



Stewart is supposed to be our 4th area airport at some time to handle the growth that JFK, LGA and EWR cannot, but right now I think there are only 3 flights a day out of there by Norwegian Air Shuttle.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join