Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Qatar Airways | Privilege Club
Reload this Page >

QR retires A380 after 10 years (~2024-2028)

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

QR retires A380 after 10 years (~2024-2028)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 13, 2019, 1:54 am
  #1  
Original Poster
Hilton Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Switzerland
Programs: AY+ Platinum, SK Gold, BAEC Silver, airbaltic VIP, Radisson VIP
Posts: 6,529
QR retires A380 after 10 years (~2024-2028)

Stumbled upon this article:

https://aviationanalyst.co.uk/2019/0...-gulf-carrier/

In an exclusive sit-down interview with Qatar Airways CEO Mr Al Baker in Doha, the State of Qatar, Al Baker told Aviation Analyst that the airline is planning to retire its A380 jets over the coming years. “For the A380s, on the 10thanniversary, we will retire them,” said Al Baker. Qatar Airways first took delivery of their first A380 ‘A7-APA’ in September 2014, and has 10 superjumbos in its fleet, operating to destinations including London Heathrow, Guangzhou, Melbourne and Sydney. “Once we have paid our financial obligations, they will go” he added.
Sad news, especially because of the bar! Their A380s were delivered between 2014 and 2018 so I would expect them to go between 2024 and 2028.

The plan is to replace them by 777X. This probably means F will go, what do you think?
florin, msm2000uk and IAD_flyer like this.
florens is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 2:07 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cardiff
Programs: qatar airways platinum
Posts: 731
A huge shame IMO. I loved the bar on the A380.. When these go Al Safwa will only be for regional Fthen?
celtic_warrior is online now  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 3:23 am
  #3  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: BOS/UTH
Programs: AA LT PLT; QR GLD; Bonvoy LT TIT
Posts: 12,753
A shame,yes, but consistent with his longtime plan which resulted in the QSuites. I love the onboard bar.
clubeurope likes this.
Dr. HFH is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 3:54 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: Some
Posts: 5,251
As a reminder, this is a quote from AAB so the timeline should clearly be taken with a pinch of salt! I would think the priority should be retiring the A340s which make absolutely no sense from an economic perspective.

The issue with the QR A380s seems to be QR isn't able to fill the Y cabin and especially so since the blockade, so QR should take out the Upper Deck Y and possibly F too to create a more J-heavy configuration and then refit them with Qsuites. The whole point of the connector model that QR and EK use is to bunch up departures in connecting banks in the morning and evening to make sure there are as many short layovers as possible, which is exactly why the A380 is a good aircraft for that model. Instead, QR e.g. currently operates 2 LHR flights and 1 LGW flight within 55 minutes of each other in an afternoon, then another 2 LHR flights plus an LGW in a 25 minute window in an evening, with a similar story for early morning departures too. This isn't LHR-NYC, most of those are connecting passengers so it really doesn't make sense for QR to offer more frequency rather than being all A380 to LHR. I also really don't get CAN (there must be some seriously valuable cargo on that route or the local Chinese government is paying QR / some sort of dodgy deal is going on) as I haven't been on an A380 to CAN with enough passengers to even fill a 787 yet. I get the impression QR could make much better use of the A380s they have if they wanted to.
lost_in_translation is online now  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 4:52 am
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Programs: Hilton, IHG - BA, GA, LH, QR, SV, TK
Posts: 17,008
Originally Posted by lost_in_translation
As a reminder, this is a quote from AAB so the timeline should clearly be taken with a pinch of salt! I would think the priority should be retiring the A340s which make absolutely no sense from an economic perspective.

The issue with the QR A380s seems to be QR isn't able to fill the Y cabin and especially so since the blockade, so QR should take out the Upper Deck Y and possibly F too to create a more J-heavy configuration and then refit them with Qsuites. The whole point of the connector model that QR and EK use is to bunch up departures in connecting banks in the morning and evening to make sure there are as many short layovers as possible, which is exactly why the A380 is a good aircraft for that model. Instead, QR e.g. currently operates 2 LHR flights and 1 LGW flight within 55 minutes of each other in an afternoon, then another 2 LHR flights plus an LGW in a 25 minute window in an evening, with a similar story for early morning departures too. This isn't LHR-NYC, most of those are connecting passengers so it really doesn't make sense for QR to offer more frequency rather than being all A380 to LHR. I also really don't get CAN (there must be some seriously valuable cargo on that route or the local Chinese government is paying QR / some sort of dodgy deal is going on) as I haven't been on an A380 to CAN with enough passengers to even fill a 787 yet. I get the impression QR could make much better use of the A380s they have if they wanted to.
In many areas, but particularly in air transport, it's not difficult to paint happiness over any strategy. Remember the enthusiasm and rosy predictions which greeted the (bonkers, doomed to failure) Utapao venture.

Of course it's just as easy to spread doom and gloom across a scenario

Truth is the A380 hasn't been quite the success that Airbus hoped for. It has worked in some cases for some carriers, but it would seem that for QR it hasn't. Scheduling it on the airline's rather awkward network can't have been easy. The "blockade" won't have made things any easier.

Once financial commitments have been sorted out it probably makes sense to take the opportunity to cut capacity by getting rid of the white elephants, replacing some of them with equipment which better matches demand.

Last edited by IAN-UK; Feb 13, 2019 at 5:18 am Reason: correction of idiocy :)
IAN-UK is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 4:59 am
  #6  
dsf
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Godalming, Surrey, UK.
Programs: Nowt of note.
Posts: 1,628
Originally Posted by IAN-UK
Truth is the A380 hasn't been the success that Boeing hoped for.
Au contraire?
intuition likes this.
dsf is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 5:20 am
  #7  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Programs: Hilton, IHG - BA, GA, LH, QR, SV, TK
Posts: 17,008
Originally Posted by dsf
Au contraire?
I bet you heard my duh! all the way from Jakarta
dsf, msm2000uk and Traveller999 like this.
IAN-UK is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 8:12 am
  #8  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PVG, FRA, SEA, HEL
Programs: UA Premier Gold
Posts: 4,783
An A380, which is just filled at 33% capacity, is not earning too much money.
warakorn is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 10:35 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 776
Originally Posted by IAN-UK
Truth is the A380 hasn't been quite the success that Airbus hoped for.
Putting it very mildly. The hub spoke model required to fill these fatties might not be dying, but it is certainly decaying. And even if full loads could be achieved, it would still fail to leverage an economy of scales effect as it has a higher CASM than several smaller models. Add to that the exorbitant development costs vs the low sales numers, and you got yourself one gigantic mess. The only feasible use case is for slot constrained airports, but since it requires special treatment like dedicated gates and super category wake turbulence spacing, it cannot even shine in that area.
As a pax I love it, but for airlines it is almost always an inferior choice. As long as pax aren't willing to pay a markup equivalent to the CASM difference, there is basically no business case for it.
makrom is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 12:38 pm
  #10  
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: BKK, CDG, TLS
Programs: QR G, A3 G, EK G, IHG Amb, GHA Black, WOH LT something
Posts: 1,306
another nail in the coffin for the A380. Pity its my favorite plane to fly, from the Bar, to the spacious bathroom in F, I like it over any other AC.
synd is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 2:13 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: SHA,CPH
Programs: SAS EuroBonus Gold, Qatar Privilege Club Gold
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by lost_in_translation
As a reminder, this is a quote from AAB so the timeline should clearly be taken with a pinch of salt! I would think the priority should be retiring the A340s which make absolutely no sense from an economic perspective.

The issue with the QR A380s seems to be QR isn't able to fill the Y cabin and especially so since the blockade, so QR should take out the Upper Deck Y and possibly F too to create a more J-heavy configuration and then refit them with Qsuites. The whole point of the connector model that QR and EK use is to bunch up departures in connecting banks in the morning and evening to make sure there are as many short layovers as possible, which is exactly why the A380 is a good aircraft for that model. Instead, QR e.g. currently operates 2 LHR flights and 1 LGW flight within 55 minutes of each other in an afternoon, then another 2 LHR flights plus an LGW in a 25 minute window in an evening, with a similar story for early morning departures too. This isn't LHR-NYC, most of those are connecting passengers so it really doesn't make sense for QR to offer more frequency rather than being all A380 to LHR. I also really don't get CAN (there must be some seriously valuable cargo on that route or the local Chinese government is paying QR / some sort of dodgy deal is going on) as I haven't been on an A380 to CAN with enough passengers to even fill a 787 yet. I get the impression QR could make much better use of the A380s they have if they wanted to.
I heard the DOH-CAN route are filled with Africans that are doing trades in CAN, flying CAN-DOH-Africa frequently with those traders.
jerrythegreat12 is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 2:16 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: Some
Posts: 5,251
Originally Posted by jerrythegreat12
I heard the DOH-CAN route are filled with Africans that are doing trades in CAN, flying CAN-DOH-Africa frequently with those traders.
I think that's the idea and maybe they are at some times of year, but I've yet to see it!
lost_in_translation is online now  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 2:30 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: SHA,CPH
Programs: SAS EuroBonus Gold, Qatar Privilege Club Gold
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by lost_in_translation
I think that's the idea and maybe they are at some times of year, but I've yet to see it!
I think this route is more likely to be as a seasonal route, like the DOH-AKL route. They can swap a 777/787 onto this route during the low season, and 388 on the peak season.
jerrythegreat12 is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 4:35 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 776
Originally Posted by jerrythegreat12
I think this route is more likely to be as a seasonal route, like the DOH-AKL route. They can swap a 777/787 onto this route during the low season, and 388 on the peak season.
DXB-AKL is already beyond what the A380 is intended to do, resulting in load constrains. Adding yet another 200 miles on top of that is not helping at all.
makrom is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2019, 7:09 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Singapore & Globe trotting
Programs: QR Gold, ITA Club Executive, Hilton Gold, GHA Titanium, Taj Gold, Accor Gold, Marriott Gold Elite
Posts: 425
Damn it! Another airline that is dumping the A380. It's sad but that's how the aviation world is developing. Funnily enough, over the years I've flown in all of QR's aircraft types in Y, J and F, barring J in the A380 (and F in their old A340-600). I know it's almost identical to the J found in the B787 and A350 (non-Qsuite version) but still, I would like to fly it!
lifeonthego_k is online now  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.