Banana4321

Apologies.

But, as you note, you get the idea....even a small 747 from where the majority of passengers require attention from the Greatest Country in the World's Finest Men & Women in Uniform fills the immigration hall way up the slope.

gw76

Thank goodness for my newly interviewed Global Entry !

Gshumway

Sorry, meant to say Baku, even the ultimate destination is TBS. Same still applies to pricing.

Armodeen

BA could easily fly the A380 to JFK and make it work. Nobody needs 15 minute variations in departure times let's be honest. The frequency argument is overused.

There are many valid reasons why the A380 isn't used to JFK currently; it's a good place to send the 747s (poorer fuel burn matters less on shorter flights, very premium heavy setups), T7 at JFK is not capable of handling A380s, T7 itself is a zoo.

chris1979

It's on LHR JFK where frequency is more important as more spread out rather than on the night sectors returning.

Down Low

BOS is on the radar to become an A380 route.

Pilot37

Interesting - is that just normal galley gossip or is there something stronger behind it?

It would make sense and would fit in with BA's targeted use of the A380 whereby they have been able to cut the number of frequencies on certain routes (HKG, LAX etc.) by introducing the A380. A departure time around 5.30pm for the A380 would probably allow them to combine the current 16.40 and 18.20 offerings.

Pilot37

Down Low

Believe they are just waiting for the infrastructure at BOS to become compatible with A380 operations.

SinoBritAsia

Reminder: JFK T7 does not have an A380 gate. So that is out of the question.

Flaming_Booty

I'm sure that if BA had a few extra A380's you'd see them on 2x HKG/JNB. HND could also be a possiblity given the slot issue around the airport.

Also no one knows what's happening to MEX when the 747's go.

Davidob

Not sure I agree with that, especially as 36% of LHR traffic is in transit to somewhere else.

Globaliser

All of the aircraft were new, so they could easily all be fitted out in exactly the same way regardless of whether they were owned or leased.

It's a bit different if you're taking used aircraft that have already been operating for other airlines. In particular, one of the problems with transferring 380s from one airline is the very high level of customisation that Airbus has allowed.

I see from another thread that fleet inconsistencies have now spread to LCY with the latest (used) 190s having a different seating layout from the new 190s taken directly from Embraer.

Flying Doctor

Hi there,
So I think you have hit on some interesting ideas.
BOS - there are 2 flights on top of one another now since AA pulled out of the route and BA took over an extra flight. The A380 would work well there (much as it does to IAD).
JNB - South African routes especially in peak season are always rammed in every class so yet could work. The only down side is that the frames are parked in JNB for several hours.
CPT - similarly in peak season CPT could easily handle an A380 as it is a route that is heavy in all classes. However, the airport cannot (yet) handle an A380. There was talk of EK wanting to send an A380 down there which would necessitate changing some of the gates and if that happens it might yet end up there in the South African Summer Season.
HKG - Premium heavy but the issue is that its often quite empty in Y/W which is a problem.
HND - I really don't know if it can take it but suspect if there is the requirement for infrastructure change there will be resistance to try to keep traffic at least in part through NRT.
MEX - again heavy in all classes and could be used but I doubt that the airport can yet handle an A380.
GRU - same as MEX. AF wanted to send an A380 down there but couldn't do it as there is not the infrastructure changes to allow this.
NBO - one of the most profitable routes in the network. Would just fill overnight with an A380 but can you imagine the fun and games - they struggle enough with a 747-400 as it is.......

So I guess the bottom line is that the A380 could be used on quite a few more routes but for a lot of them the infrastructure is not there. This of course will probably change over time (and indeed this was exactly the same issue in the early 70's with the 747-100 where most airports could not cope) but won't be that quick and also for some of these airports they want to at least protect the local carrier a bit and allowing in the A380 with its huge capacity does the exact opposite.......

FD.

Globaliser

Not HKG, AIUI: Not only is filling Y now a real struggle, with constant promotional activity needed, there is good cargo demand. The 380 has very little cargo capacity; in contrast, the 77W has cargo capacity by the bucketload. So on the basis of what I've heard, I'd be surprised if a second 380 was put on HKG to replace the 77W.

mikeyfly

Sounds like a couple of Super-Hi J 77W are needed!