Qater/DL Atlanta A380 Premiere
Jun 4, 2016, 9:04 am
#91
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: MEM
Programs: Starbucks Green Card
Posts: 5,431
BTW who's to say Atlanta wont have more A380 service in the future? Emirates is going to be serving Atlanta any time soon if not double daily, Qatar could up gauge to an A380, Etihad could also bring one in. Even Korean, and Lufthansa could come back with A380's. Even Turkish could have A380 service in the future when they order the air frame.
Also, there is work being done to make gate F3 A380-capable.
http://airport.blog.ajc.com/2015/10/...per-jumbo-jet/
Jun 4, 2016, 9:06 am
#92
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Osaka
Programs: United Mileage Plus Premier Executive
Posts: 581
Maybe Delta should focus on improving service instead of complaining all the time about QR. As a passenger I find Delta's International J class dated and the service needing improvement. If Delta provided a better product for the prices they charge they might not lose market share to Carriers like Qatar and Emirates. Hopefully There will not be any gate issues in the future and Delta actually update their hard and soft products or lower their prices with the service they provide now.
Jun 4, 2016, 9:15 am
#93
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 182
The A380 is worthless from a safety and efficiency point of view in regards to moving traffic. Any guesses of how much in trail space Atlanta Center is required to give Atlanta TRACON with traffic behind an A380 due to wake turbulence and the subsequent compression as aircraft slow near the airport to land? If you guessed THIRTY MILES you're the winner! Do you have any idea how many aircraft ZTL can fit within that thirty miles normally? Another five aircraft... Are you willing to be one of those fifteen delayed aircraft simply for three A380s to fly in to ATL a day? Any guesses why the TRACON can't clear an aircraft for an ILS behind an A380? If you guessed because it knocks out the signal for the glideslope/localizer until it exits the runway, you're the winner again! Do you know what happens when an aircraft loses that navigational aid in ILS PRM approaches? It starts deviating down the final putting it in direct conflict with aircraft on adjacent finals! To summarize, the A380 is completely worthless... Rant over
Jun 4, 2016, 9:26 am
#94
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ATL Lost Luggage
Programs: Kettle with Kryptonium Medallion Tags
Posts: 10,304
Qatar Airways CEO blasts Delta for ATL gate kerfluffle
More juicy ATL news:
and
Link to the full article:
AJC.com: Qatar Airways CEO blasts Delta for gate kerfluffle (June 4, 2016)
Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker has called out Delta Air Lines for its role in a clash that left Qatar’s super-jumbo jet without a gate to pull up to for its inaugural flight at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport.
This week, Al Baker called Delta “wicked” for ruining Qatar Airways’ inaugural flight to Atlanta, according to a Bloomberg report from an International Air Transport Association meeting in Dublin.
“This is an absolute violation of the air-services agreement,” Al Baker said, according to Bloomberg. “Old and frail people had to walk up very large steps to get into the terminal. We had check-in issues, we had obstruction in loading handicapped passengers.”
A report from Aviation Daily said Al Baker accused Delta of “obstruction” and said “suppliers have been intimidated by Delta.”
Delta responded with a statement saying: “Delta in no way acted to obstruct Qatar’s ability to park its aircraft at an Atlanta gate.”
“This is an absolute violation of the air-services agreement,” Al Baker said, according to Bloomberg. “Old and frail people had to walk up very large steps to get into the terminal. We had check-in issues, we had obstruction in loading handicapped passengers.”
A report from Aviation Daily said Al Baker accused Delta of “obstruction” and said “suppliers have been intimidated by Delta.”
Delta responded with a statement saying: “Delta in no way acted to obstruct Qatar’s ability to park its aircraft at an Atlanta gate.”
AJC.com: Qatar Airways CEO blasts Delta for gate kerfluffle (June 4, 2016)
Jun 4, 2016, 9:27 am
#95
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,095
If enough airlines express interest in flying the A380 to ATL, then ATL would likely look at having more A380 capable gates. They're not going to break their back for 1) a one-off flight 2) operated by an airline that is in a rather big spat with their biggest carrier.
And what makes you think TK is going to order the A380?
And what makes you think TK is going to order the A380?
Honestly I don't care about Delta nor Qatar, but I would really like to see Atlanta get some more A380 gates. For god sake DWC will have enough gates, and remote stands for over 200 Super Jumbo's on the ground in the future, and Atlanta only has one at the moment. That is embarressing not just for the biggest airport in the world, but the largest economy in the world. One of the reasons the Middle East is performing the way they are is because of airport infrastructure investment.
Jun 4, 2016, 9:32 am
#96
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Back in Reds Country (DAY/CVG). Previously: SEA & SAT.
Programs: DL PM 1MM, AA PLAT, UA Silver, Marriott Bonvoy Titanium
Posts: 10,348
Put aside the Delta Qatar spat, think logically. Honestly me as a paying customer I couldn't care less if an airline is subsidized, or not.
BTW who's to say Atlanta wont have more A380 service in the future? Emirates is going to be serving Atlanta any time soon if not double daily, Qatar could up gauge to an A380, Etihad could also bring one in. Even Korean, and Lufthansa could come back with A380's. Even Turkish could have A380 service in the future when they order the air frame.
It's like saying your car doesn't need power steering because you still steer it manually, but it's still good to have. Heck when you go to any airport do you take the stairs, or escalators because you really don't need escalators.
BTW who's to say Atlanta wont have more A380 service in the future? Emirates is going to be serving Atlanta any time soon if not double daily, Qatar could up gauge to an A380, Etihad could also bring one in. Even Korean, and Lufthansa could come back with A380's. Even Turkish could have A380 service in the future when they order the air frame.
It's like saying your car doesn't need power steering because you still steer it manually, but it's still good to have. Heck when you go to any airport do you take the stairs, or escalators because you really don't need escalators.
Jun 4, 2016, 9:48 am
#97
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,394
And Al Baker said the actions of the Atlanta airport and Delta will be taken up “very seriously” by the Qatar government, according to Bloomberg.
They want to destroy competition so they can one day jack up prices when the ME3 have monopolized transoceanic routes. They are not offering super great service at very low prices because they just love everyone.
Jun 4, 2016, 10:29 am
#98
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SEA
Programs: UA Silver, BA Gold, DL Gold
Posts: 9,779
Honestly I don't care about Delta nor Qatar, but I would really like to see Atlanta get some more A380 gates. For god sake DWC will have enough gates, and remote stands for over 200 Super Jumbo's on the ground in the future, and Atlanta only has one at the moment. That is embarressing not just for the biggest airport in the world, but the largest economy in the world. One of the reasons the Middle East is performing the way they are is because of airport infrastructure investment.
As to the need for ATL to have multiple A380 gates... Well, consider who operates the A380. Among the small number of operators, ATL is out of range for MH, SQ, TG, and QF. While technically in range, limited fleets means the probability of CZ, OZ, QR, BA, EY, or LH using an A380 on the route is indistinguishable from zero.
The only possible A380 operators to ATL would be AF, KE (if they ever made up with DL), and EK. The pool of carriers that could conceivably be looking for A380 gates at ATL is really quite small.
Yep QR is totally not an instrument of the state who care deeply about profits and normal economics.
They want to destroy competition so they can one day jack up prices when the ME3 have monopolized transoceanic routes. They are not offering super great service at very low prices because they just love everyone.
They want to destroy competition so they can one day jack up prices when the ME3 have monopolized transoceanic routes. They are not offering super great service at very low prices because they just love everyone.
Jun 4, 2016, 10:32 am
#99
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SEA
Programs: UA Silver, BA Gold, DL Gold
Posts: 9,779
You may not care in the short term. But you will care in the future when a subsidized carrier has established a monopoly position through capacity dumping and forced other players out of the market. I'm not expecting the passengers to think that long-term, but the government should be.
Jun 4, 2016, 10:48 am
#100
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Programs: DL DM & 5MM, WN
Posts: 1,451
In general I'd want to fly with an airline that actually has a clue about where its chosen airplane will go when it lands at its destination. The fact Qatar actually flew the plane with no landing arrangements was incompetent. Their indignation would have made more sense if they had held a press conference in Doha and said the A380 needed to be cancelled. But they flew, disabled pax and all, which means they didn't even know.
Jun 4, 2016, 11:17 am
#102
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,685
The A380 is worthless from a safety and efficiency point of view in regards to moving traffic. Any guesses of how much in trail space Atlanta Center is required to give Atlanta TRACON with traffic behind an A380 due to wake turbulence and the subsequent compression as aircraft slow near the airport to land? If you guessed THIRTY MILES you're the winner! Do you have any idea how many aircraft ZTL can fit within that thirty miles normally? Another five aircraft... Are you willing to be one of those fifteen delayed aircraft simply for three A380s to fly in to ATL a day? Any guesses why the TRACON can't clear an aircraft for an ILS behind an A380? If you guessed because it knocks out the signal for the glideslope/localizer until it exits the runway, you're the winner again! Do you know what happens when an aircraft loses that navigational aid in ILS PRM approaches? It starts deviating down the final putting it in direct conflict with aircraft on adjacent finals! To summarize, the A380 is completely worthless... Rant over
TERMINAL
(1) Separate aircraft operating directly behind or directly behind and less than 1,000 feet below, or following an A388/An225 on approach by:
NOTE –
1. When applying wake turbulence separation criteria, directly behind means an aircraft is operating within 2,500 feet of the flight path of the leading aircraft over the surface of the earth.
2. Consider parallel runways less than 2,500 feet apart as a single runway because of the possible effects of wake turbulence.
(a) A388/An225 behind A388/An225 – minimum radar separation.
(b) A388/An225 behind Heavy or B757 – minimum radar separation.
(c) Heavy behind A388/An225 – 6 miles.
(d) Large/B757 behind A388/An225 – 7 miles.
(e) Small behind A388/An225 – 8 miles.
(2) When applying wake turbulence separation criteria that are defined in minutes, add 1 additional minute.
Jun 4, 2016, 11:25 am
#103
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,095
This is steering into a subsidies topic which I really want no part of, seen, and read to many of them to bother any more. All they do is go in circles any way with no out come.
Let the airlines, and governments figure that out for them selves. I neither work for any airline, nor do I have any vested interest in any airline either.
If Atlanta doesn't have any A380 let it be, to each there own.
Let the airlines, and governments figure that out for them selves. I neither work for any airline, nor do I have any vested interest in any airline either.
If Atlanta doesn't have any A380 let it be, to each there own.
Jun 4, 2016, 11:39 am
#104
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wayne, PA USA
Programs: DL MM, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, HHonors Gold
Posts: 7,242
Pretty sure the wingspan would essentially take up two gates, save for this one specific gate.
My feeling is that while Qatar didn't provide notice, had it been an airline that DL has good relations with, like KE or AF or KL, they would have made it work. Guessing DL didn't try very hard here either (though they were under no obligation to do so).
My feeling is that while Qatar didn't provide notice, had it been an airline that DL has good relations with, like KE or AF or KL, they would have made it work. Guessing DL didn't try very hard here either (though they were under no obligation to do so).
Jun 4, 2016, 12:13 pm
#105
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 182
That's a failing of the FAA, moreover ATL tracon. Separation for a 747 / A380 in Europe is 6nm. For a 737 / A380 it's 7nm. If what you purport is true that's not any of the international carrier's fault. My guess is it's mostly fiction.
TERMINAL
(1) Separate aircraft operating directly behind or directly behind and less than 1,000 feet below, or following an A388/An225 on approach by:
NOTE –
1. When applying wake turbulence separation criteria, directly behind means an aircraft is operating within 2,500 feet of the flight path of the leading aircraft over the surface of the earth.
2. Consider parallel runways less than 2,500 feet apart as a single runway because of the possible effects of wake turbulence.
(a) A388/An225 behind A388/An225 – minimum radar separation.
(b) A388/An225 behind Heavy or B757 – minimum radar separation.
(c) Heavy behind A388/An225 – 6 miles.
(d) Large/B757 behind A388/An225 – 7 miles.
(e) Small behind A388/An225 – 8 miles.
(2) When applying wake turbulence separation criteria that are defined in minutes, add 1 additional minute.
TERMINAL
(1) Separate aircraft operating directly behind or directly behind and less than 1,000 feet below, or following an A388/An225 on approach by:
NOTE –
1. When applying wake turbulence separation criteria, directly behind means an aircraft is operating within 2,500 feet of the flight path of the leading aircraft over the surface of the earth.
2. Consider parallel runways less than 2,500 feet apart as a single runway because of the possible effects of wake turbulence.
(a) A388/An225 behind A388/An225 – minimum radar separation.
(b) A388/An225 behind Heavy or B757 – minimum radar separation.
(c) Heavy behind A388/An225 – 6 miles.
(d) Large/B757 behind A388/An225 – 7 miles.
(e) Small behind A388/An225 – 8 miles.
(2) When applying wake turbulence separation criteria that are defined in minutes, add 1 additional minute.
Do you know what runways the A380 can use at ATL due to wingspan restrictions or weight issues? I'm sure you have no idea of that either, but feel free to look it up online. Also, we were talking about ILS PRMs, but I'm sure you have no clue what that means either so Google that as well...
Better yet, let me know the next time you have a layover or free time in Atlanta. I'll pick you up at the airport, give you a tour of ATL and A80, and you can offer your professional advice.