Beginning of the end for the A380?

[Himeno]

My bet is that not only will there never be an NEO, but there will not be a 900 either. It's a niche product, which has been overtaken by the capability of the big twins. There is pretty well no need for quads now...and it will be reduced to zero in the future.

So quad passenger aircraft will be dead once the remaining national aviation authorities *cough*CASA*cough* allows more then ETOPS180?

 

[TomVexille]

So quad passenger aircraft will be dead once the remaining national aviation authorities *cough*CASA*cough* allows more then ETOPS180?

Well there's really only a few southern routes that require more than ETOPS 180

 

[Isochronous]

Isn't there already an A380 variant that has better range and fuel efficiency which would suit QF to DFW a lot?

 

[TomVexille]

Isn't there already an A380 variant that has better range and fuel efficiency which would suit QF to DFW a lot?

Are you thinking of the wing twist?

 

[TedE]

It's a niche product, which has been overtaken by the capability of the big twins. There is pretty well no need for quads now...and it will be reduced to zero in the future.

A plane without engines? That is a radical design idea, would certainly save on fuel but I don't see how you would get the required thrust without the engines.

 

[JohnK]

I wasn't keen on the A380 when it first came out but came to like the aircraft as a suitable replacement for routes without 747.

But with no obvious second hand market they may be convinced to keep them at some very cheap lease rates

LCCs?

 

[TomVexille]

LCCs?

I can see it now, JQ A380 SYD-DPS with 790 seats

 

[UP4014]

I can see it now, JQ A380 SYD-DPS with 790 seats

I'm surprised it hasn't happened already, I'm sure it's up for consideration.


Matt

 

[straitman]

I'm surprised it hasn't happened already, I'm sure it's up for consideration.


Matt

Please don't give them ideas.

 

[seanpodge]

I thought that the slow turn around times for a A380 (imagine how long it will take to board and disembark 790 people), along with the extra airbridge fees and other airport costs made it unattractive for LCCs? I could only see it happening for genuine long haul (e.g. Aus to USA) where the turn around issues would be a smaller proportion of the flight time, if that makes any sense.

 

[moa999]

I thought that the slow turn around times for a A380 (imagine how long it will take to board and disembark 790 people), along with the extra airbridge fees and other airport costs made it unattractive for LCCs? I could only see it happening for genuine long haul (e.g. Aus to USA) where the turn around issues would be a smaller proportion of the flight time, if that makes any sense.

Tend to agree.
Almost all LCCs model is relatively young 737/320s for low maintenance, and narrowbody for quick turns
(very few have used older aircraft albeit Southwest does have an older fleet still have 737-300s, and some of the Asian carriers have used 2nd hand fleets inc Jetstar Pacific (Vietnam). Again very few have gone widebody aircraft save for Scoot (777/787), AirAsiaX (330), JetstarInt (330/787), CebuPacific (330), JinAir (777)

 

[harvyk]

I can't see LCC's getting in on the A380 action, primary airports and premium gates aren't their style, and it's a big aircraft to try and fill in a world that values frequency over size.

 

[jb747]

I thought that the slow turn around times for a A380 (imagine how long it will take to board and disembark 790 people), along with the extra airbridge fees and other airport costs made it unattractive for LCCs? I could only see it happening for genuine long haul (e.g. Aus to USA) where the turn around issues would be a smaller proportion of the flight time, if that makes any sense.

High density configurations would be unlikely to be capable of long range ops.

 

[jsoprano]

What is the highest-density A380 out there anyway? From the top of my head I am not aware of any airline that doesn't fly it in a standard configuration with at least 3 classes.

Back to the original topic, the A380 was always going to be a niche product given its size. That its demise may come early now is probably not a surprise if you look back at developments over the last 10 years that have impacted and changed the airline industry.

 

[whatmeworry]

IIRC Lufthansa has the highest density at 525 in 3 classes. Air Austral were meant to take 2 A380 with ~800 configuration.

[h=2]Of 11 largest A380 airports, only three – JFK, LAX and Hong Kong – are not home to a local A380 operator[/h] In the first week of May-2014 there are 1,272 one-way A380 sectors. Given Emirates' large A380 fleet, it is unsurprising Dubai accounts for one-fifth of A380 movements. Besides Emirates, only Qantas flies to Dubai on Melbourne/Sydney-Dubai-London Heathrow routings. The next four largest A380 hubs – London Heathrow, Singapore, Paris CDG and Frankfurt – are also home to local A380 operators.
The sixth largest A380 hub – Los Angeles – is not home to any locally based A380 operator. But the seventh and eighth largest A380 airports, Bangkok and Sydney, are home to A380 operators. The ninth largest A380 airport, Hong Kong, is not home to a local A380 operator. Both Seoul Incheon and New York JFK see an equal number of A380 movements and tie for the 10th largest ranking.

 

[Awesom Andy]

Air Austral were meant to take 2 A380 with ~800 configuration.

One must wonder what the turnaround time would be, getting 800 pax off and another 800 on, via a remote gate accessible only by buses and (a lot of) stairs.

 

[seanpodge]

High density configurations would be unlikely to be capable of long range ops.

Rules out SYD-DFW I guess. How would SYD-LAX work in a LCC A380? No chance or possible but not reliable enough for the job like the 747 to DFW?

I also speculate that something like LHR-JFK would be both physically possible and have the need given slot constraints whilst also having the potential passenger demand to fill an A380 reliably.

 

[seanpodge]

What is the highest-density A380 out there anyway? From the top of my head I am not aware of any airline that doesn't fly it in a standard configuration with at least 3 classes.

Back to the original topic, the A380 was always going to be a niche product given its size. That its demise may come early now is probably not a surprise if you look back at developments over the last 10 years that have impacted and changed the airline industry.

Airbus A380 seat configurations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[jb747]

The entire model of the LCCs is that they have to fly full, or very close to it. The fuel component of long range trips increases dramatically (you burn fuel just to carry fuel, with about 50% lost every 12 hours). If you want to put an extra 300 pax on, that will mean about 30 tonnes that you have to remove from fittings, freight and fuel. Basically you'd end up with an 8-10 hour aircraft...which would probably be full of brawls as the passengers revolted.

 

[JessicaTam]

The entire model of the LCCs is that they have to fly full, or very close to it. The fuel component of long range trips increases dramatically (you burn fuel just to carry fuel, with about 50% lost every 12 hours). If you want to put an extra 300 pax on, that will mean about 30 tonnes that you have to remove from fittings, freight and fuel. Basically you'd end up with an 8-10 hour aircraft...which would probably be full of brawls as the passengers revolted.

{Insert joke about LCC and revolting pax here}