Discussion
Article in The Times recently:-
THE boss of Airbus has ended months of speculation by confirming that the plane maker will build a new version of its superjumbo, the A380.
Fabrice Brégier told The Sunday Times that the A380neo, which will have new engines, could be ready for sale in five years. “We will move to the A380neo type. You can say that. Absolutely. We will need it between 2020 and 2025,” he said.
The A380 programme has struggled to find customers; one carrier, Emirates, accounts for about half the 300 planes ordered so far. Without more sales, the production line has only enough work to last to the end of the decade.
Brégier said that as well as new engines, the new version would have better wings, which be would be made at Airbus’s plant in Broughton, north Wales. The neo will cost $3bn to develop.
The current A380 can carry up to 600 passengers — 150 more than the Boeing 747 jumbo jet.
Brégier said Airbus had not decided whether the fuselage on the new version would be extended to provide more seats, but that the company would not do a stretched version “for one airline”.
New engines will help to cut the plane’s operating costs. Brégier said Airbus was likely to select just one engine supplier, with analysts saying the choice is between Rolls-Royce and its American rival General Electric.
Brégier said that were Britain to leave the European Union, “the sky would not fall on our heads”.
THE boss of Airbus has ended months of speculation by confirming that the plane maker will build a new version of its superjumbo, the A380.
Fabrice Brégier told The Sunday Times that the A380neo, which will have new engines, could be ready for sale in five years. “We will move to the A380neo type. You can say that. Absolutely. We will need it between 2020 and 2025,” he said.
The A380 programme has struggled to find customers; one carrier, Emirates, accounts for about half the 300 planes ordered so far. Without more sales, the production line has only enough work to last to the end of the decade.
Brégier said that as well as new engines, the new version would have better wings, which be would be made at Airbus’s plant in Broughton, north Wales. The neo will cost $3bn to develop.
The current A380 can carry up to 600 passengers — 150 more than the Boeing 747 jumbo jet.
Brégier said Airbus had not decided whether the fuselage on the new version would be extended to provide more seats, but that the company would not do a stretched version “for one airline”.
New engines will help to cut the plane’s operating costs. Brégier said Airbus was likely to select just one engine supplier, with analysts saying the choice is between Rolls-Royce and its American rival General Electric.
Brégier said that were Britain to leave the European Union, “the sky would not fall on our heads”.
Max_Torque said:
Mojocvh said:
"the new version would have better wings"
wonder what he actually means by better?
Considering that the current A380 wing is probably the single best designed and optimised lifting surface in commercial aviation, i suspect he just means "different" rather than better ;-)wonder what he actually means by better?
Max_Torque said:
Mojocvh said:
"the new version would have better wings"
wonder what he actually means by better?
Considering that the current A380 wing is probably the single best designed and optimised lifting surface in commercial aviation, i suspect he just means "different" rather than better ;-)wonder what he actually means by better?
hacksaw said:
Max_Torque said:
Mojocvh said:
"the new version would have better wings"
wonder what he actually means by better?
Considering that the current A380 wing is probably the single best designed and optimised lifting surface in commercial aviation, i suspect he just means "different" rather than better ;-)wonder what he actually means by better?
Airbus would be better walking away from the project as demand simply isn't there to justify it. Developing a new aircraft for just one operator doesn't seem a great idea to me. Even Boeing have abandoned this sector entirely, as everyone now wants big twins like the A350s and B777x
Kenty said:
Article in The Times recently:-
THE boss of Airbus has ended months of speculation by confirming that the plane maker will build a new version of its superjumbo, the A380.
Fabrice Brégier told The Sunday Times that the A380neo, which will have new engines, could be ready for sale in five years. “We will move to the A380neo type. You can say that. Absolutely. We will need it between 2020 and 2025,” he said.
The A380 programme has struggled to find customers; one carrier, Emirates, accounts for about half the 300 planes ordered so far. Without more sales, the production line has only enough work to last to the end of the decade.
Brégier said that as well as new engines, the new version would have better wings, which be would be made at Airbus’s plant in Broughton, north Wales. The neo will cost $3bn to develop.
The current A380 can carry up to 600 passengers — 150 more than the Boeing 747 jumbo jet.
Brégier said Airbus had not decided whether the fuselage on the new version would be extended to provide more seats, but that the company would not do a stretched version “for one airline”.
New engines will help to cut the plane’s operating costs. Brégier said Airbus was likely to select just one engine supplier, with analysts saying the choice is between Rolls-Royce and its American rival General Electric.
Brégier said that were Britain to leave the European Union, “the sky would not fall on our heads”.
For the sake of British jobs, industry and some pride, I hope they go with Rolls Royce for the engines THE boss of Airbus has ended months of speculation by confirming that the plane maker will build a new version of its superjumbo, the A380.
Fabrice Brégier told The Sunday Times that the A380neo, which will have new engines, could be ready for sale in five years. “We will move to the A380neo type. You can say that. Absolutely. We will need it between 2020 and 2025,” he said.
The A380 programme has struggled to find customers; one carrier, Emirates, accounts for about half the 300 planes ordered so far. Without more sales, the production line has only enough work to last to the end of the decade.
Brégier said that as well as new engines, the new version would have better wings, which be would be made at Airbus’s plant in Broughton, north Wales. The neo will cost $3bn to develop.
The current A380 can carry up to 600 passengers — 150 more than the Boeing 747 jumbo jet.
Brégier said Airbus had not decided whether the fuselage on the new version would be extended to provide more seats, but that the company would not do a stretched version “for one airline”.
New engines will help to cut the plane’s operating costs. Brégier said Airbus was likely to select just one engine supplier, with analysts saying the choice is between Rolls-Royce and its American rival General Electric.
Brégier said that were Britain to leave the European Union, “the sky would not fall on our heads”.
Max_Torque said:
Mojocvh said:
"the new version would have better wings"
wonder what he actually means by better?
Considering that the current A380 wing is probably the single best designed and optimised lifting surface in commercial aviation, i suspect he just means "different" rather than better ;-)wonder what he actually means by better?
New Engine Option; when the NEO and Sharklet MOD was released for S/A family it resulted in 50-60% of the wing being re-designed, albeit to cope with the Sharklet MOD.
Initial rumours suggest an incorporation of the Trent (RR) engine from the A350 to bring about a higher level on interchange-ability (ICY) within multi-family operators.
Initial rumours suggest an incorporation of the Trent (RR) engine from the A350 to bring about a higher level on interchange-ability (ICY) within multi-family operators.
el stovey said:
hacksaw said:
Max_Torque said:
Mojocvh said:
"the new version would have better wings"
wonder what he actually means by better?
Considering that the current A380 wing is probably the single best designed and optimised lifting surface in commercial aviation, i suspect he just means "different" rather than better ;-)wonder what he actually means by better?
Airbus would be better walking away from the project as demand simply isn't there to justify it. Developing a new aircraft for just one operator doesn't seem a great idea to me. Even Boeing have abandoned this sector entirely, as everyone now wants big twins like the A350s and B777x
el stovey said:
hacksaw said:
Max_Torque said:
Mojocvh said:
Developing a new aircraft for just one operator doesn't seem a great idea to me.
Serious question... I realise there is more to a "re-engine" than strapping on a couple of different engines, but "Developing a new aircraft"? Is there really that much to do?Onyx, see my above post ref A320 NEO albeit with the integrated Sharklet MOD.
50-60% wing redesign, I cannot say how much was just due to NEO.
Imagine changing he engine in your car and how it would change the dynamics! Performance, economy, weight, ability to interface with existing systems etc! Could be a lot more too it than plug and play, although the new A350 has been developed with a 'plug and play' engine change system, although with the same engine types.
50-60% wing redesign, I cannot say how much was just due to NEO.
Imagine changing he engine in your car and how it would change the dynamics! Performance, economy, weight, ability to interface with existing systems etc! Could be a lot more too it than plug and play, although the new A350 has been developed with a 'plug and play' engine change system, although with the same engine types.
el stovey said:
Airbus would be better walking away from the project as demand simply isn't there to justify it. Developing a new aircraft for just one operator doesn't seem a great idea to me. Even Boeing have abandoned this sector entirely, as everyone now wants big twins like the A350s and B777x
Boeing haven't abandoned the "Very Large Aircraft" sector. Their offering in the VLA market, the 747-8, is still being produced and Boeing are still chasing sales (although the lack of new sales means the production rate is dropping). In what will likely be a very limited market, Boeing's decision to re-wing, re-engine, and extend the now 45 year old design of the 747 was entirely understandable, but that cheaper option can't compete with the clean sheet design of the A380.Of course in hindsight there's a good case to be made that neither company would have invested in the VLA market given the ever increasing capabilities of the new big twins. The VLA market is clearly smaller than both Airbus and Boeing hoped, but while we have likely seen the last development of the 747, Airbus effectively has the VLA market to itself so we can expect to see some development to continue selling it to the few airlines that can operate the A380 profitably.
I think longer term there is a market for the A380.
As the skies get busier and landing slots get more congested the one way to get more bums on seats will be be the A380 or alike especially to places like LHR.
Currently not really viable for a route like LHR to JFK as frequency seems to be key here but as demand increases and as fuel prices down the line will increase will it not be more likly that we will see more of these in the air
Who knows if some entrepreneur will come along, lease an old A380 - fit out 853 economy seats and start charging £250 LHR to JFK return. ( BTW i have no clue if in reality this would be viable).
As the skies get busier and landing slots get more congested the one way to get more bums on seats will be be the A380 or alike especially to places like LHR.
Currently not really viable for a route like LHR to JFK as frequency seems to be key here but as demand increases and as fuel prices down the line will increase will it not be more likly that we will see more of these in the air
Who knows if some entrepreneur will come along, lease an old A380 - fit out 853 economy seats and start charging £250 LHR to JFK return. ( BTW i have no clue if in reality this would be viable).
fizz47 said:
Who knows if some entrepreneur will come along, lease an old A380 - fit out 853 economy seats and start charging £250 LHR to JFK return. ( BTW i have no clue if in reality this would be viable).
Some chap called Laker tried this in the 70s/early80s. Didn't end all that well. Not an A380 though, obv.fizz47 said:
I think longer term there is a market for the A380.
As the skies get busier and landing slots get more congested the one way to get more bums on seats will be be the A380 or alike especially to places like LHR.
Currently not really viable for a route like LHR to JFK as frequency seems to be key here but as demand increases and as fuel prices down the line will increase will it not be more likly that we will see more of these in the air
Who knows if some entrepreneur will come along, lease an old A380 - fit out 853 economy seats and start charging £250 LHR to JFK return. ( BTW i have no clue if in reality this would be viable).
Maybe LTN-JFK if you're talking budget?As the skies get busier and landing slots get more congested the one way to get more bums on seats will be be the A380 or alike especially to places like LHR.
Currently not really viable for a route like LHR to JFK as frequency seems to be key here but as demand increases and as fuel prices down the line will increase will it not be more likly that we will see more of these in the air
Who knows if some entrepreneur will come along, lease an old A380 - fit out 853 economy seats and start charging £250 LHR to JFK return. ( BTW i have no clue if in reality this would be viable).
You'd need a stack of real money behind you; problem is it's huge logistical thing to make work, any one issue that grounds it will leave you a bucketload of problems and no solutions. A "fleet" of 2 or 3 smaller widebodies may lack the economies of scale but also the level of financial risk.
fizz47 said:
Who knows if some entrepreneur will come along, lease an old A380 - fit out 853 economy seats and start charging £250 LHR to JFK return. ( BTW i have no clue if in reality this would be viable).
So if you shop right, you can get a return LHR-JFK for £360 with BA.
Of that £153 is Taxes, and Airport fees, which are likely to be fixed per passenger. (and these doesn't seem to vary whether you fly on 777, 787 or 747)
£163 is fuel surcharge and then the "fare" is £44.
Interestingly BA seem to fix the fuel surcharge by distance/seat, not the plane too as this again doesn't seem to vary between plane types.
So £207 is BA's take, and £153 is taxes.
So to bring the cost down to £250/seat round trip for economy, you're going to need to be able to fuel the aircraft, pay the crew + maintenance and make profit on £97/seat for a return trip.
That works out at £82741 in revenue for a round trip for your 853 passengers.
An A380 burns around 4000gallons of fuel per hour, so for the 12 hours of flying round trip, that's 48000 gallons @ optimistically £2.00/gallon… so £96000
You're already in the red with just fuel costs. The numbers don't work for LCC style long haul.
In the case of BA, they're reducing the number of economy seats, and increasing the number of business class seats, (e.g. on their 747s they're refitting many with over 80 club world seats, up from 52-72), because that is where they make their profits, and they're filling those cabins.
Just been reading about (lack of) potential orders for the A380, which I think is a real shame, (with exception of Emirates), airlines don't seem to be able to make it work in large quantities..
I was particularly surprised by this comment:
"The Emirates president Tim Clark has said he is ready to buy as many as 200 more A380s if a more fuel-efficient model is introduced."
http://www.thenational.ae/business/aviation/201511...
I was particularly surprised by this comment:
"The Emirates president Tim Clark has said he is ready to buy as many as 200 more A380s if a more fuel-efficient model is introduced."
http://www.thenational.ae/business/aviation/201511...
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff