Registered Users have the option of removing this and all other advertisements.  Moreā€¦

A380

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by aasz1978, Jan 18, 2005.

Tags:
  1. aasz1978

    aasz1978 Member

    Jan 12, 2005
    126
    1
    Firstly I think one of the reason why QF jacked up the points required to travel is because of the new A380.

    Call it a conspiracy theory but I couldn't help watching the timing.

    Imagine if people are all banking up points so they can enjoy the new A380 (which happens to have entertainment spaces) while QF would not be able to offer paying customers, who will probably be paying a premium for the first 12 months because of the hype factor.

    That would give QF quite a headache.

    Too bad Singapore is going to have it first for Sydney to Singapore trip (not Melbourne)

    Can't wait for the new A380.
    Registered Users don't see this and have the option of removing all other advertisements.  Register HERE
     
  2. thadocta

    thadocta Active Member

    Firstly, very few people are enthusiastic enough about aviation to care about their aircraft type, so I doubt that everyone is waiting for the introduction of this behemoth.

    Secondly, how do you know it will have entertainment spaces? Airbus have released "concept images" which show what *could* be done, but that doesn't mean the airlines will do it. Until QF releases the seat plans we will not know.

    Dave
     


  3. arun

    arun Member

    Sep 5, 2002
    311
    0
    Sydney
    I tend to agree with Dave. With increased seats, I am sure they can accommodate more frequent flyers.

    I read yesterday that Richard Branson is talking about the possibility of having double beds and casinos.

    Also, apparently low cost carriers can fill in with 800 cramped seats. Large cattle shed, I imagine.

    I can see which side QF will be inclined towards :wink:
     
  4. NM

    NM
    Moderator

    Aug 27, 2004
    15,698
    1,179
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    I doubt they will get certification to get 800 seats into a A380-800. Such certifications are based on the ability to get people off the aircraft in an emergency and they emergency exits on the A380-800 are not sufficient for that many people. This was initially a problem for the Boeing 737-900 for operators that wanted to use it in all WHY config. Boeing had to make some changes to the emergency exits to get it certified for sufficient pax for an all WHY layout.

    I believe the 800 number has come from proposed future stretched versions that may or may not be produced.
     
  5. Rossmurdoch

    Rossmurdoch Junior Member

    Oct 11, 2002
    42
    0
    Sydney
    I tend to think that any ideas that do not contribute to revenue generation will go the way of the original 747 upper deck bar
     


  6. Guest

    Guest Guest

  7. markis10

    markis10 Veteran Member

    Nov 25, 2004
    30,088
    5,547
    BNE & SYD
    The 747-400D is certified to carry 568 pax and has 5/8ths of the passenger area of the airbus in lateral fuselage space, so 800 is entirely possible using the same emergency door layout implemented in the 400D, that is not to say I would want to be one of those 800 - "get me an exit row please"
     
  8. NM

    NM
    Moderator

    Aug 27, 2004
    15,698
    1,179
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    And for an Australian-registered 800 pax aircraft, under the current regulations the operator would be reuquired to have 25 FA's on board! In some other countries that number may reduce to 16.

    I can find no reference to 800 pax on any of the Airbus documentation. That number seems to have been extrapolated from the Airbus suggestion of 555 in a typical 3-class config. SQ has stated they will commence operation with 480 and QF has stated 501. Its interesting that both these are well below the AB suggestion of 555. But how long with they stay with 480 and 501 respectively?
     
  9. Rossmurdoch

    Rossmurdoch Junior Member

    Oct 11, 2002
    42
    0
    Sydney
  10. straitman

    Moderator

    Apr 27, 2003
    16,081
    4,292
    SE Oz (Sale)
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
  11. aasz1978

    aasz1978 Member

    Jan 12, 2005
    126
    1
    1000 people on planes????

    Have they gone nuts? It already takes yonks for people now to get through Check Ins and Immigration in particular Melbourne Airport, with 1000 people, how early are we suppose to be?

    3hrs? Sounds good if that's what they want in order for us to spend more at their airports.
     
  12. NM

    NM
    Moderator

    Aug 27, 2004
    15,698
    1,179
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    I can't see 1000 people on an A380 really happening. The highest density flights currently are the 747-400D's operated by JAL for Japan domestic flights, with something like 550 pax. The problem with taking this to 1000 is the time taken to board and deboard the pax and how that affects the turn-around time.

    Airbus afre quoting 15 pax/min per door boarding. So 1000 pax, through two concurrent aerobridges/doors (M1L, and U1L) would take 33 mins, plus the 4 mins they suggest for the final pax to be seated, requiring 37 mins boarding. Deboarding rate is 25 pax/min requires 20 mins. Add refueling, cleaning and catering and we have a turnaround time of over 90 mins (and maybe 2 hours depending on catering and refueling requirements). All of a sudden the efficiencies of the A380 are severely impacted compared to operating multiple smaller aircraft. So I think it is safe to predict we won't see high-density A380's operating SYD-MEL any time soon. This is why QF operates 767's at 20 mins intervals rather than 747's on this route. Its all about turn-around times.

    Long turn-around times ok on longhaul flights where the constraints of timetables, curfews etc often require long waits at destinations (consider QF operations to LHR and LAX as an example). But experience shows that the long-haul operators make considerable profit from their premium class products, so they are not going to be operating regular flights with all WHY high-density config. Its the charter operators that may consider such high-density configs for long-haul operations. And longhaul charter flights are something I will always avoid for this very reason.
     
  13. Bob

    Bob Member

    Jun 8, 2004
    180
    7
    Brisbane (sometimes)
    The only people waiting with baited breath for A380s will be terrorists with MANPADS.
     
  14. Andyzx

    Andyzx Active Member

    Jan 7, 2004
    515
    65
    Sydney
    Airbus A380 too expensive!

    Thought i would share this link with you. Its a report done on the viability of the A380 in 2001 and updated in 2002. Its a little out of date but basically says that the A380 will never repay its investment!
    Link
    http://www.speednews.com/A380-CPA.pdf

    Sorry its 99 pages :shock:

    Comments:: 800 seats will not be an economical flight, details pg 29, costs of airport upgrades pg 25, technology pg 96 :idea:

    Lots of additional info in there as well including types of 3 class planes flying and info on passenger and aircraft loading.

    Should keep you awake doing some bed time reading.
    happy reading :arrow:
     
  15. infoworks

    infoworks Member

    Aug 11, 2002
    377
    9
    Sydney
    SQ has announced they will have 500 seats on their 380s, and begin on the Kangaroo Route, so that may help pressure QF to have a vaguely reasonable configuration.

    I suspect all airlines will begin low and sardine more as they become more operational and less the new toy attraction they are currently pushing. Remember making money from expensive metal is the game.
     
  16. oz_mark

    oz_mark Enthusiast

    Jun 30, 2002
    16,873
    1,486
    Melbourne
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    I have seen a number of newspaper reports such as this one that state that Airbus will be doing evacuation tests with 853 people.
     
  17. thadocta

    thadocta Active Member

    SQ and QF announced several months ago what the capacities of the A380's would be, namely c.500. I forget at th moment what the QF figure was, but something in my head says 506, certainly somewhere around that range.

    QF will be introducing the A380 on flights to the Untied States first. Main reason is stage lengths, you need two aircraft to provide a daily service, you need three aircraft to provide a daily service on the Kangaroo Route. I think QF will use the LAX services to develop experience with the A380 in the early stages.

    SQ on the otherhand with their base halfway (well, not quite, you know what I mean) along the Kangaroo Route is ideally placed to use the A380 on this route, far more so than QF will be in the early stages of its introduction.

    Dave
     
  18. Andyzx

    Andyzx Active Member

    Jan 7, 2004
    515
    65
    Sydney
    A380 to LAX

    For those who have read the A380 report in my other post :shock: , there are comments on the cost to upgrade airports and would airports spend the money to do it.

    I googled LAX and got back these comments
    Los Angeles is also spending $53 million to reconfigure its airport.

    "According to airport officials, LAX is modifying two boarding gates at the Tom Bradley International Terminal and four remote boarding facilities at the west end of the airfield in order to accommodate the new large aircraft. The new buses are 60-foot-long, articulating models that have a capacity of up to 140 passengers with carry-on baggage."
    Lets hope if your in 1st or Bus class you dont get stuck in the middle of cattle class waiting for the buses! :cry: and luggage could be a long wait

    My hope is that Q and others won't increase the "taxes" just because you are flying the big plane, but i guess like everything else they will pass on any increase to them. I would have thought an extra 100 1st / Bus class seats might have paid for it.
     
  19. Bob

    Bob Member

    Jun 8, 2004
    180
    7
    Brisbane (sometimes)
    Re: A380 to LAX

    That's it. The day Qantas start flying these aircraft to the LAX remote boarding facilities my trans Pacific business goes elsewhere. I have experienced these 'facilities' and buses with 747s. Last time it took nearly two hours from terminal to take off.
     
  20. NM

    NM
    Moderator

    Aug 27, 2004
    15,698
    1,179
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    Re: A380 to LAX

    And of course the problem with the use of the remote gate facilities is that they are only used when all the gates at TBI are in use, and that generally means the arrivals hall is chockers with pax from those other flights. So its not just the bus ride back to the arrivals hall that causes a delay, its the long queues resulting from the many other aircraft as well.
     
Loading...

Share This Page