Consolidated "Airbus 380 - problems and discontinuation" thread
#46
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: LBB
Programs: UA 1K 1MM ★G | Marriott LTT | Hilton ♦ | Hertz PC | Global Entry TSA Pre ✓
Posts: 2,820
The A380 and B787 are both niche aircraft. They serve entirely different niches, and because of that, they will both succeed in the long run. As others have mentioned, the A380 will replace 747's, while the 787 will replace 762-764 and 757 aircraft, which are becoming more and more legacy every year.
Where I believe Airbus will go wrong is with the A350. It will be harder for this aircraft to compete with the smaller (220 seat capacity) and equally (if not more) efficient and equally range-worthy B788. Airbus was late into this market, and I believe the A350 is too large of an aircraft. Short term, the A350 will bust, as the 777 fleet is not that old... but when it comes time to replace those, the A350 will be a good choice, but they will be competing with B787-9's and 10's too.
Where I believe Airbus will go wrong is with the A350. It will be harder for this aircraft to compete with the smaller (220 seat capacity) and equally (if not more) efficient and equally range-worthy B788. Airbus was late into this market, and I believe the A350 is too large of an aircraft. Short term, the A350 will bust, as the 777 fleet is not that old... but when it comes time to replace those, the A350 will be a good choice, but they will be competing with B787-9's and 10's too.
#47
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Here today gone tomorrow
Programs: *G, ow Saph
Posts: 2,865
For those who have flown on the Dreamliner... one of its selling points was the pressurization and humidity control and how it makes passengers less fatigued after the trip. How does the pressurization and humidity compare to the A380? I flew on the A380 on two legs recently (one 12 hours, one 5 hours) and the 747 (13 hours) and I must say, the 747 air was very very dry...
It may be a commercial failure (doubtful) but it's certainly a passenger success. Given the way it's been rolled into service with most airlines that are flying the 380, more people go out of their way to book ON to the 380 than to book AWAY from it.
#48
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
The case for the VLA will strengthen slightly throughout the 21st century as those superhubs catch "LHR flu" and tighten up slotwise, but not fast enough to lead to an A380 production run of 1000 aircraft. Anyway the more efficient response will be to ramp up the long-thin-twin alternative routes that circumvent the superhubs, not go out and buy a bunch more A380s.
The only possible, slight business case for a Stateside A380 would be as a dedicated Pacific subfleet based at SFO for UA or SEA for DL, but the costs of operating a few narrow-mission aircraft in that fashion -- an aircraft inappropriate for any other application on the airline's system -- would probably outweigh the benefits.
#49
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: MIA
Programs: American Airlines - EXP (5 mm), Hyatt Diamond, MLife Noir, SPG Plat, Hertz President Circle
Posts: 11
Absolutely it is a failure from a commercial perspective but a success from an engineering one. It will go down as white elephant because the two dominant air travel markets, America and China will not purchase the plane. A 50% discount on the aircraft is why Emirates would purchase the plane, it becomes highly costs effective at that price.
#50
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SAN
Programs: Nothing, nowhere!
Posts: 23,301
Absolutely it is a failure from a commercial perspective but a success from an engineering one. It will go down as white elephant because the two dominant air travel markets, America and China will not purchase the plane. A 50% discount on the aircraft is why Emirates would purchase the plane, it becomes highly costs effective at that price.
#51
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London; Bangkok; Las Vegas
Programs: AA Exec Plat; UA MM Gold; Marriott Lifetime Titanium; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,745
While not wildly successful as a passenger aircraft, it is doing very well as a cargo carrier. Of the 120, 69 are cargo aircraft and you can expect the ratio to increase on the cargo side of the equation as time goes by.
Keep in mind that the first delivery of a 747-8 was not until October 2011.
Sorry, but I find the A380 to be one of the ugliest airplanes ever built. I will concede, however, that the Shorts 360 is worse.
#52
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: FB Silver going for Gold
Posts: 21,801
A couple of factors that will hurt the A380s financial ( vs. accounting) breakeven are the initial investment costs and the initial sales. IIRC, the development cost for the programme ballooned from something like $4bn to $10-11bn, and then you had the delivery misaligned-wiring delays because someone at Airbus did not upgrade the Dassault design software to the same version. Early orders were reportedly being given 40% off the $250m list price in the very early 2000s so that's a loss of capital recovery of $100m off each early frame (I think the first 50-100). That would extend the breakeven substantially if you consider time value of money (albeit lower these days, it's still higher for shareholder capital than interest rates at the bank).
Note that Boeing is equally hurt by the 787's lengthy delayed development and delivery but there are more frames to make up this early loss.
One other thing, mentioned on A.net, is resale. The first frames are going to be coming up to their major checks in the next few years. There's pretty much no conversion value unlike for other a/c.
Note that Boeing is equally hurt by the 787's lengthy delayed development and delivery but there are more frames to make up this early loss.
One other thing, mentioned on A.net, is resale. The first frames are going to be coming up to their major checks in the next few years. There's pretty much no conversion value unlike for other a/c.
#53
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: LAX
Programs: UA, Bonvoy, Amex Plat
Posts: 1,582
The first round of "used" a380s will hit the market within the next 2-3 years when SQ starts dumping their 2007-era whales. It will be very interesting to see what happens to those. A friend of mine in the airline industry surmises that freight companies will be the biggest potential buyers of secondhand a380s, though my sense is that they are too expensive to operate for that to be the case.
#54
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: SFO
Programs: WFBF
Posts: 963
US LCCs tend to standardize on either the 737 or the A320 family. The differentiator seems to be simply that airlines which were in business prior to the existence of the A320 picked the 737, and airlines established later have picked the A320.
#55
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: FB Silver going for Gold
Posts: 21,801
The first round of "used" a380s will hit the market within the next 2-3 years when SQ starts dumping their 2007-era whales. It will be very interesting to see what happens to those. A friend of mine in the airline industry surmises that freight companies will be the biggest potential buyers of secondhand a380s, though my sense is that they are too expensive to operate for that to be the case.
#56
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: AA EXP,AS MVPG,MR Platinum,HH Gold
Posts: 1,343
Airbus knew, going in, that there would be a limited number of sales of the whale. There are many reasons, including the wingspan and other considerations. Boeing had long discussions of going with a revamped B747 having a larger upper deck or with a new double-deck design; they chose neither. The two companies decided on different strategies for four-engine aircraft: Airbus with the A380 and Boeing staying largely out (the B747-8i is having some sales). I seem to recall that Airbus originally said they needed to sell something like 350 - 450 of the A380 to break even (I might be off - being old with weak memory, but there is a number). According the airfleets.net, they are at about 166 with some more for the future. If the A380 is produced long enough, it MAY break even, but I suspect it may not. Consider that Boeing has sold over many times that number of B474s, although over many years. Airbus does have the advantage of European taxpayer support in their commercial line.
I don't think it's out of the question that they will sell 350-450 planes; they've got 318 firm orders to date and 28 options (for a potential total of 346 planes) thus far. The plane was only introduced to service at the end of 2007 -- for comparison the 777 entered production in the early to mid 90s. I'd say there's pretty good chance they'll come out either even or ahead on this bird.
Originally Posted by YVR Cockroach
Too much reinforcement of floors needed. Lots of wasted space and difficult to reach the top deck too. Really doubt there will be any value.
#57
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
Absolutely it is a failure from a commercial perspective but a success from an engineering one. It will go down as white elephant because the two dominant air travel markets, America and China will not purchase the plane. A 50% discount on the aircraft is why Emirates would purchase the plane, it becomes highly costs effective at that price.
With its rising CASM and fares pegged at or above those of the network carriers, it's debatable whether WN still counts as an LCC.
#59
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 960
You don't see a lot of Silverados or Suburbans in European cities because they don't fit well. It isn't a matter of law, it's a matter of feasibility. It's hard to justify the investment for new roads (or runways) for few big cars (or planes)
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: FB Silver going for Gold
Posts: 21,801
I don't think it's out of the question that they will sell 350-450 planes; they've got 318 firm orders to date and 28 options (for a potential total of 346 planes) thus far. The plane was only introduced to service at the end of 2007 -- for comparison the 777 entered production in the early to mid 90s. I'd say there's pretty good chance they'll come out either even or ahead on this bird.
I was always curious why they scrapped the 388F; Wikipedia cites "production delays".