A380 Viability Question

[pgsdiver]

Hi Folks,
I've been reading a bit about the problems with the A380, and the mooted A380Plus program Airbus is using to try to save the program.
And over the past few days the retirement of the first commercially delivered A380 from SQ has been in the news.
I'm interested in any industry folks being able to explain why an aircraft like the A380 wouldn't be viable on a route like SYD-MEL (or BNE). Substitute any other busy route.
Is it down to the cost per seat kilometre or is there just not enough bums to fill the seats? Or perhaps the fact it is short-haul (although from memory I remember reading the A380 was intended for crowded shorter routes)?
Regards,
Peter

 

[mannej]

The answer comes down to Frequency vs Capacity regarding why it isn’t used on the triangle.

Bigger planes, but less flights or more flights but on smaller aircraft.

 

[Sethor]

Will never be viable on shorter routes, with longer turn around times it would spend more time on ground rather than in air making money.

 

[Flying Fox]

Will never be viable on shorter routes, with longer turn around times it would spend more time on ground rather than in air making money.

I'm also guessing that fuel burn is very high when getting the A380 into the air and the cost/seat/km only becomes economical when at cruising altitude. Thus short cruise distances don't make the A380 very profitable.

 

[Himeno]

QF has used the A380 on domestic flights before, but those have been adhoc one offs for service recovery from major disruptions (ie, the volcanic ash cloud from Chile a few years ago).

QF has used 747s on the PER transcons as a regular scheduled flight from time to time. How would such a flight compare when using an A380?

 

[Daver6]

I'm also guessing that fuel burn is very high when getting the A380 into the air and the cost/seat/km only becomes economical when at cruising altitude. Thus short cruise distances don't make the A380 very profitable.

Although on short sectors it wouldn't be loaded up with fuel which I imagine would be a large factor in that though.

 

[UP4014]

Many reasons I would suggest. All of the above plus...

When you see a 737 pull into Sydney from Melbourne it's gone again in 30mins, a 380 wouldn't even have everyone off the plane in that time.

Likely you could only use on a relatively few trips each day, of course during peak hours but what do you do with it the rest of the time, run it half empty as it lacks the flexibility of going elsewhere during the day or on weekends.

So you'd be putting on one of the most costly aircraft to buy and operate to cover maybe an hour in the morning peak and an hour in the evening peak. Better to raise the fares to reduce demand and make more money that way. Otherwise with half empty planes it's a race to the bottom until the deck chairs can't be shuffled any more.

Matt

 

[kelvedon]

Airbus might be struggling to sell the A380, but their smallest aircraft is selling well. US firm investment company Indigo whose investments include a Frontier Airlines and Wizz has just eclipsed Boeings 787 Emirates deal
( which was worth $40bn) with a $49bn order for 430 A320 neo's

Airbus unveils its biggest aircraft order

 

[UP4014]

I think with many things aircraft and airlines it's big egos wanting the biggest plane.

Airbus shouldn't have gone there.

 

[straitman]

Will never be viable on shorter routes, with longer turn around times it would spend more time on ground rather than in air making money.

Correct. If you look back far enough into the Ask the Pilot Thread you will see where jb747 has mentioned how the A380 actually slows down the passenger movement rate when compared to several smaller aircraft.

 

[seanpodge]

Basically, the airlines are tending to go for frequency over size. Particularly on SYD-MEL type flights, the plane can spend nearly as long on the ground as in the air. Turning around a A380 so it can do the next sector is a time (and therefore money) consuming task. The main uses for A380s are for long haul flights to popular but slot constrained airports like LHR. Even though SYD also has limits, airlines would probably look more towards an A330 or B787 than to an A380.

That said, there are some air routes in Asia of similar length to Australian domestic routes where large planes (B747s for example) are commonly seen.

 

[codash1099]

Interesting approach:

What to do with 20 A380’s nobody wants? Mark Lapidus of Amadeo has the answer.

 

[jb747]

Interesting approach:

What to do with 20 A380’s nobody wants? Mark Lapidus of Amadeo has the answer.

Right business model (perhaps), but totally wrong aircraft.

 

[codash1099]

Right business model (perhaps), but totally wrong aircraft.

Not sure they've got a lot of options.

 

[straitman]

Right business model (perhaps), but totally wrong aircraft.

I agree with jb747.

 

[Himeno]

Interesting approach:

What to do with 20 A380’s nobody wants? Mark Lapidus of Amadeo has the answer.

Turn them into airport hotels?

 

[jb747]

Turn them into airport hotels?

Don't buy them in the first place. They haven't been built. I'd expect getting out of the contract would cost a lot less than actually taking them.

 

[Must...Fly!]

Don't buy them in the first place. They haven't been built. I'd expect getting out of the contract would cost a lot less than actually taking them.

Have (other people's) money. Will spend.

Their website page on this is interesting. Some of the graphs etc are a bit misleading, unless I'm missing something. The O&D traffic/yield graph doesn't make sense to me. E.g. ADL-LHR is listed despite not being served by the aircraft. Think of how many ways you could get from Adelaide to London by stepping foot on at least one A380 at some point. I can think of at least ten airlines. Big surprise yield would be higher on a route like that for example, as the only one-stop operators run A380s at some point (e.g. QR, EK, SQ). But not to/from ADL itself. Never mind flying via SYD/MEL. A380

Considering their existing client base (Portfolio) and promotion of the 11-abreast seating it seems these planes will only ever end up in the UAE. Which Emirate is anyones guess, and at what price. Wouldn't want to the be the one signing on the dotted line at Airbus HQ for these birds. Two airlines have collapsed in Europe in the past 3 months because they couldn't make money, unsure why this high cost operation pipe dream would do anything but lose big money.