maeharasmuse

Today EK and Airbus firmed a top-up order for another 32 A380's.

Anyone who's ever flown this bird will welcome this news with delight, as it is definitely a plane in a league of its own (superior passenger comfort, especially on long haul flights).

There is no doubt NH could use the plane on some of its intercontinental routes, in a move that would pretty much leave the local competition (including some of the U.S. airlines) hanging in the wind.

Now with SQ, LH, AF flying their A380's into TYO, and with EK, BA, QF and others firming up plans to do so as well, what are NH waiting for to order this plane for themselves???

It should be clear by now, that there simply is no other plane on the market (despite NH's best efforts with the coffee-grinding-noised 77W) that will allow ANA to compete with the ultra-high comfort levels provided by the A380.

Now, don't get me wrong: I generally prefer ANA's services, even on long haul flights (especially compared to the increasingly faltering JAL). It makes me wonder how the NH A380 experience would compare to SQ's, EK's, BA's...

There will come a point where ANA's frequent flyers (a great deal of whom are premium/corporate customers) will start noticing, and sooner or later they'll start voting with their feet... foreign airlines or not!

Seriously, what are ANA waiting for to order such a marvel of a plane??

((My guess: Once again, presidential approval out of Washington??))

.

payam81

Not every plane fits every airlines use.

While I too enjoy the A380 on SQ, the 77W is a fantastic bird with proven record. A380 is hardly that much different on the main deck Y, it's the upper deck Y with the 2-4-2 that gives a bit more comfort and quiet.

ORDnHKG

Name at least 5 please. 1 or 2 routes cannot substain an order for a new plane type, plus it is bigger than a 747.

Waiting to see if pax loads would pick up enough for any routes could maintain A380. A380 may provide high comfort level, but if they can't make money on it, why bother ? Seriously, do you want NH to end up like JL ?

How do you know 787 or A350 cannot provide ultra high comfort level provided by A380 ?

You are wrong on that, Japanese are very loyal to their own country, especially their own airlines, no matter NH is going to get A380 or not, they are not going to abandon their own products.

Unimatrix One

People said the same thing about 747s in the past. Eventually many airlines dumped them in favor of smaller widebodies, and did passengers all flock to the airlines that kept their 747s? No.

jimyvr

First of all, ANA is now reconsidering the New Large capacity passenger jet, according to an article few weeks ago.

Second, the main problem is, Does it really matter A380 or 777-300ER operating if the Premium Products (F/C) are Identical? Will the same product on A380 be more roomier? Not quite.

Third, ANA is expanding Internationally. However, the new 777-300ER with new FCY products has lesser capacity to keep the yield high. Will ANA be able to maintain the same yield if they order A380?

ctflyer3000

This. Well considering NH is getting rid of their 747s in favor of the more efficient 777 I doubt they will purchase the A380. Not only is filling capacity but operating cost a major factor. Japan has very expensive landing taxes, when an airplane touches down on Japanese soil it pays a per pound fee, with the weight of that thing they'd have to have it full all the time to justify the cost.

maeharasmuse

On other airlines the difference is even more noticeable.
1. First of, there is the smoothness and quietness of flight of the A380. It's just amazing.
2. Then of course there is a lot more effective floor space on an A380. I know NH has been trying to outdo the competition in this field, but there are some economic/structural problems if you're trying to do this with a 77W against the competition's A380s... In fact the A380 is the perfect plane for NH's product/service quality strategy. Of course profitability and yields are an issue as well (e.g. on high yielding thinner routes), but still, the A380 is a very economic plane to fly and operate.


NYC, SFO, IAD, LON, PAR, DUS, ZRH, SIN, HKG, MOW,... from the top of my head (of course depending on yields, network structure, fleet operations, best alternatives, etc.).

I really can't see how 787 / 350 would be able to provide the same ultra high comfort levels provided by the A380. Even if they were operated by Privat Air. The A380 is a very big plane, it's very wide and very spacious (e.g. against the windows), and very smooth. I just don't expect those smaller planes to provide the same comfort.

AFAIK the Japanese customer is very patriotic indeed. But this is largely an issue of trust, service and quality (and to a lesser extent loyalty to the own traditions and/or group indeed), rather than of blind nationalism. The Japanese are crazy about foreign stuff, as long as it's cool/cute, high quality and authentic/design. In fact it's not so difficult to convince the Japanese custumore, as long as you've got the right product to do so. As soon as a certain group of customers moves to the airlines operating the A380, others might (and imho will) follow suit.

Well, hundreds of 747s were sold and operated over the 30 years it has been in operation... Imho the 747 has been a fantastic plane, and it has been a success story for many airlines (except maybe JL). What then happened is that other planes appeared like the 330/777 that allowed the airlines to operate the routes with similar comfort levels and with much better economies...

Beware though!!! You cannot compare the A380 to any other plane around, not to the 777 and certainly not to the 747. The A380 is a plane in a league of its own.

Have you ever been on one?????

NH also needs to react to the competition. In many cases, flying the A380 out of HND to big international hubs, maintaining the present high premium ANA product would be the best way to do so. I dont think 748i can compete with A388 or A389 in terms of economies of operation. And as I said, there's just no way you can compare a 777 (let alone a 747) with an A380.

I'm not saying the competion's product will necessarily be much roomier (though the A380 is VERY spacious and VERY silent), but I think it will be hard (if not impossible) for ANA to compete, short of taking on a PrivatAir or a SQ A345 product definition and pricing structure.

A380 is more efficient than B777 is more efficient than B748 is more efficient than B744.

I am aware of the ludicrous landing tax structure in TYO and OSA... just as I am aware of the problems at NRT and at KIX. GOJ needs to do more to remedy this situation, it's just one of many problems in the Japanese air services industry.

Nevertheless, I think it's fair to presume that most A380 operators will send their A380s to TYO, and not just to NRT but also - sooner or later - to HND (SQ having already stated that it intends to do so ASAP).

Consequently I fail to see why ANA couldn't operate the plane in/out of these airports as well.

.

chornedsnorkack

SQ did explain the economics of 777-300ER vs. A380.

On SIN-CDG, SQ replaced 10x weekly 777-300ER with 7x weekly A380-800. They boosted capacity, from 2780 to 3297, and yet cut costs by 3 %.

On SIN-ZRH, SQ replaced 12x weekly 777-300ER with 7x weekly A380-800. The capacity shrank only slightly (3336 to 3291), but a big saving in costs.

How many routes does ANA have, that have more than 7 weekly 777-300ER or 747-400 flights?

ORDnHKG

Apparently, you are not even familiar with NH's route structure.

NH does not even fly to DUS, ZRH, MOW. Putting a plane with the biggest capacity in the world on a new route just mean you are telling them to jump off the cliff.

For other cities you mentioned, some are not even served by a 77W like HKG, SIN, and IAD does not have enough loads for 77W year round either, that means it doesn't even have the load for 380.


How do you know ? Have you flown on one yet ?

If 787 /350 is not going to be a good plane, how do you explain they both have more firm orders than the 380 ?

Keep in mind, passenger comfort level is the second, being able to save fuel and make money for the airline is the first.


None.

maeharasmuse

Although I am not privy to ANA's route network structure and economies, and although I have been reading about how NH as a public company is doing far better than JL, I am not really sure ANA's network is really optimized yet.

I know in the last cple of years they've been fine-tuning their production/product, and apparently quite successfully so. Still, there is more work to be done, whilst the market is evolving (e.g. JL demise, Japanese population decreasing, *A expansion, HND expansion, etc.).

NH also needs to keep an eye on its partners/competitors who are planning to start flying the A380 into TYO and maybe also into KIX (e.g. EK).

Some thoughts:

1. I remain convinced that ANA could make a killing at ZRH, DUS and IAD (which in more than one way fits the ZRH/DUS profile). Other airlines have already proven the market is there, including a lucrative Japanese expat/business market. I am doubtful that overall yields to MOW are as high as DUS, ZRH or IAD (the latter two *A hubs), but I included MOW b/c I think there is quite a premium market there as well. Admittedly, I haven't analysed the numbers for any of these cities, so you might say indeed I don't really know what I am talking about. I am willing to admit that. It's just a gut feeling though, in answer to your question to name more than 2 routes - which I am convinced there are - where ANA could operate the A380. You call it jumping off a cliff... I think ANA could clear these markets with the A380, and make a bunch of money at that.

2. The ANA business model isn't about maximizing the number of seats on any given plane. What they're after is higher yields/RASM by providing a better product. It's not just a matter of ANA leaving some of their prospective customers behind for having downsized the average plane size. Above all it's a matter of having redefined the product on offer and the markets targeted, even if they have to "abuse" their planes in a certain way. Well, flying the A380 doesn't necessarily preclude that. Quite on the contrary. Especially if they're going to have to deal with competitors flying that plane type right into their backyard. Like SQ, who are now planning to even increase the number of A380s serving TYO, or like the GCC carriers (especially EK) who also have an outstanding product.

3. I haven't said 787/350 won't be good planes. I am sure they will be (though I am not really sure about the first batch of B787s). There's a lot more missions were the 787/350 will be the better plane. However, you can't deny the A380 is just a plane in a league of its own, especially from a pax perspective, but apparently also from the airlines' perspective. I think it's not very probable that any other plane will anytime soon be able to provide the same passenger comfort, flight experience and operational space the A380 is providing (space, noise reduction, floor space, smoothness of flight). The only thing that comes to mind were the initial reports about B787 providing higher air pressure and higher air humidity, but apparently in the meantime Boeing has had to reintroduce so many corrosive materials into the B787, the air humidity will be pretty reduced as well. Besides, the airlines flying the A380 so far, have experienced a noticeable pax preference (and price premium) for the A380. This is a development that is not ebbing away (on the contrary!). I don't think we will see anything similar with the 350/787.

4. Admittedly, the NRT-HND mess makes it a lot more difficult for ANA as an airline to explore interconnecting network economies (feed etc.), but if given the choice as a passenger, I would pick a flight on an SQ A380 over an NH 767 anyday, just like I would pick a BA 380 or LH 380 over an NH 777... And I think, overtime, you will find I won't be the only one!!

Anyway, I am not necessarily trying to win the argument here. I am just putting in my point of view, as a passenger, based on my relatively limited knowledge of the airline's network economies, and based on my extensive experience as a frequent flyer (worldwide on many airlines and on many airliners, including both the A380 and B77W - and ANA's B767s).

I'm sure you're more familiar with many of the issues at hand here (no pun). But let me assure you that I'll just stick to flying the A380 as much as I can. Even if I have to pay a premium to do so...

.

NoMiddleSeat

Interesting thread. Far from an expert and I rarely chime in (# of posts clearly indicate that) but a few thoughts.
- Japanese airlines are very Boeing centeric.
- Like oil, gold, or a lot of other exploration it seems all the easy and somewhat difficult routes have been found and tapped. Its an incredible gamble to take on an other fleet type for a perceived market. I'd bet the farm they've (NH) explored every city cited for service or to up gauge equipment.
- I'm far from convinced the A380 is a important aircraft. Quite simply its a big bird. 400+ in Y doesn't sound fun unless you are an airplane geek. Then again, a C cabin with 80+ sounds awfully large. I find LH's 340-600 C cabin service a bit slower because of its size and it isn't 80+.
Respectfully, I see the A380 as a bit of an albatross. If the typical R&D tipping point is about 350 hulls you have to figure the A380 with cost overruns, delays and discounting for said delays has to be about 500 hulls. It took Boeing 40 years to sell 1400 747's - many of those years without competition from a big twin (read:777). Factor out EK you have tepid interest in the A380. The 787 has about 850 hulls on the books.... Including NH as launch customer. The B787 has interest from huge number of airlines, which indicates its market importance.... 380....not so much.

silverkris168

Perhaps NH could do well at serving, ZRH, DUS and IAD. However, IMO, at present, they are relatively thin-capacity routes....which would weigh against a large-capacity aircraft such as the A380. The usual approach would be to start small and build up capacity. I don't see the A380 being the optimal plane for these routes. Maybe LHR-NRT would be one, and JFK-NRT another, but I don't see others off the top of my head. And since NH has been dumping their 747s for 777s, even on relatively high capacity routes to JFK, SFO and LAX, I don't really see them seriously considering the A380, which is even bigger than the 747.

I also call it jumping off a cliff with serving relatively unestablished routes. You'll note that SQ deploys the A380 on well-established routes, such as the Kangaroo routes from SYD to LON via SIN.

ctflyer3000

If you look at markets that the A380 would be a viable option for NH (JFK, LAX etc) they are already saturated. It is more of a capacity issue than anything.

The only international route NH flies without direct competition is NRT - BOM, and the fact that they use a 737 shows they don't want to jump into any route with that beast.

jimyvr

Sorry to be harsh and pointing finger, but your thought, suggestions, is among the reason why JAL is bankrupt today. The way you see A380's superiority (I'm not doubting the plane itself) is no different to what people sees Boeing 747 aircraft during its first 10 years.

ORDnHKG

+1

SQ put 380 only for routes that already served by 744 several times a day, other than the one you mentioned, also for SIN-HKG and SIN-NRT. SQ wouldn't even take the risk to put it on SQ 1/2 HKG-SFO, scrap it for a later date.

NH had been on a conservative side for a very long time, look at NRT-HKG, while JL and CX had been using 4 times daily 744 at its peak years, NH only used 1x 744 since late 80s ! Not until the last few years it added a second flight with 763 and HND-NRT. Even if NH back then has small fleet, they always convert 744 to 744D back and fourth.