Originally Posted by
airsurfer
It is sad, because I like the A380, even in Y. I have flown EK many times and tomorrow I'll fly again to AMS-DXB-BNE, both A380 flights. Maybe my last 380 flight ?? Or will EK (and the other A380 airlines) keep them for several years for a few high density connections ?
But I hear that the 787 and 350 are lovely airplanes as well, I have never been inside these.
Isn't it ths case that the reason EK canceled because of the engines are not efficient enough ? Maybe sometime in the future, airlines can get an engine upgrade, or do I think too simplistic ?
I understand that 777X / 787 / 350 are more versatile, more suitable for point to point connections than an A380.
On the other hand, EK complains about fuel efficience which is not as good as the 777 / 787 / 350, but why do they make so many fuel inefficient ULH flights for which they even sacrifice 24 Y seats in the rear for a rest area for a spare crew ?
Why don't they fly to Australia / NZ with a single stop in Asia instead of nonstop ? Two hours longer, but less fuel consumption.
Engines often get an upgrade to make them more fuel efficient. It's certainly part of RR's sales method (assuming they can made fan blades that don't corrode!) On average, fan blade / engine improvements improve fuel efficiency by approx 1% per year. Therefore it's fairly easy to sell an upgrade as that 1% can save a lot of cash. However I would think that the big jump in fuel efficiency is with composite materials of the 787 / 350. The A380 also has the disadvantage of 4 engines too, which is where the newer 777 beats it.
T