Airbus A380 At 50

[ThreeSpool]

Fifty A380s flying. I wonder whether we will hear more about the A380-900 now that they seem to have a handle on the production side of things.

Airbus A380 At 50

Posted by Robert Wall

Airbus today has delivered the 50th A380.

The milestone aircraft went to Singapore Airlines, which was also the airline to receive the first A380 back in October 2007.

It is the 12th aircraft delivered to Singapore, with seven more to come. Several of those should follow quickly, as they are awaiting delivery at Airbus. Deliveries of A380s to SIA had been delayed because of problems with Koito seats; the aircraft just handed over was initially due for delivery last year.

The reason for the delay is that the Japanese seat maker had its production organization approval suspended for two years because it falsified seat test data. That meant Airbus could not hand over aircraft for several months until regulators determined what to do. A path to address the issues is now in place, clearing the way for the aircraft to finally go to the airline.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...medium=twitter

[KabirT]

Apparently many analysts say that the A380 is still slow when it comes to production output, and this is one of the reasons why EK is not placing orders for a few more (this and that DXB proving to be small). The popular opinion seems to be that Airbus does require a second assembly section for the whalejet.

[ThreeSpool]

Emirates Airline already have 90 orders, it boggles the mind what they are going to use them for, never mind adding more.

I genuinely think the A380 needs a North American order; either United Air Lines or Delta Air Lines. Both are very unlikely.

[mrtotty]

It hardly seems like the A380 has been flying for almost four years. Our school playing fields are below one of the approach paths to LHR and the boys always look up when one flies over.
Quite a magnificent machine.

[KabirT]

I don't think the 380 fits in the business models followed by US carriers, which is frequency based and not size based. But a lot of aircraft will be required by US carriers to replace ageing fleets of 757s, 767s and a whole lot of MDs. It will be interesting to see what Boeing pitches against the A320NEO family.

Emirates will face an increasing amount of resistance from countries, as the recent problems with Germany have shown. Even India has not allowed EK to operate the 380 into DEL. My EK source tells me EK wants to fly the 380 to five points in India as soon as possible including Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai.

The only A380 that may get permission for operations into Delhi seems to be LH, and that depends on how soon AI joins Star Alliance.

[ThreeSpool]

You could say that the 747-400 is too much aircraft for the frequency-driven US market, but they seem to have their place. The main stumbling block for the A380 I think is that there are only certain routes that US airlines could use the capacity, but that only means a small fleet which may now be economical.

Europe has an interesting problem with the A380 and Emirates Airline. On one had they need to sell the A380, on the other hand they don't want Emirates poaching traffic from their own airlines.

[KabirT]

The tiff between EK and Germany goes very deep ThreeSpool, I wish I could divulge the whole saga here, but unfortunately I cant.

[symon]

Does anyone know what the break-even figure is for the A380? Wiki says 234 have been ordered so far.

[Bmused55]

Depends on who you talk to.

Most "experts" on aviation forums say it's 150.
Figures of 250 and 400 have been bandied around by various articles over the years, with a couple claiming it will never make money.

I think, it's the 250 to 300 mark.

[pierrepjc]

After delivering the 50th yesterday, AIRBUS handed the 51st over to AIR FRANCE today.

Paul

[Joemicroman]

Good to see A380 deliveries in full swing now (: which airline will recieve an A380 after Malaysian Airlines ?

Joe

[pierrepjc]

AIRBUS delivered the 52 today.

Paul

[Bmused55]

Wow, only 10 more years and they'll have delivered the current backlog.
Such a slow beast!

[Grey Area]

Ooooh! You're clutching at straws a bit now, Sandy.

[Sky High]

Kabir - if you cannot divulge a saga, it sounds a bit more than a tiff!

[cockerhoop]

on Flight tracker 24 they A380 is easy to spot from its symbol, seems quite a few track over UK airspace,
also on the flight tracker i was amazed to how the KLM or FedeX DC10/MD11s are easy reconisable by the symbol shape

[Bmused55]

Ooooh! You're clutching at straws a bit now, Sandy.

What? *innocent*

[ThreeSpool]

At least they will still be building A380s long after they have shut the 747 line.

[Bmused55]

mmm, not so sure about that.

[nJayM]

At least they will still be building A380s long after they have shut the 747 line.

They may well do but not just yet - wait for the Plastic Pig to go 'live' (Aug/Sep 2011) and the announcements from Boeing in Q1 on a competitor to A320NEO.
Boeing may have some 'rabbits' to pull out of the bag based on all composites and may very well be looking at whose buying what in their own country (absolutely the only way to travel in that huge continent) before worrying too much about long haul/large numbers which may see a move towards Hypersonics (liquid Hydrogen) long term.
In the meantime the much larger version of the VW Golf in the motor world equivalent the newer Boeing 747s will keep going, why not?

[nJayM]

A few figures


................B747.........A380
Current Yr..2011..........2011
Start Yr.....1970..........2007
No. of Yrs...41.............4
Aircraft......1500..........52
Av. Per Yr...36.59 ........13.00

I guess a lot of catching up to do - dare I say on whose part

[KabirT]

@Sky High - you are right, much more than a tiff. Just need to find time and publish it all soon.

[Ship 741]

On the 747 program, it took Boeing roughly 5 years from program launch to deliver 96 airplanes, they delivered 92 in the second year of deliveries. In the first 11 years of the program, Boeing delivered about 300 airplanes.

By comparison, the A380 is 11 years into the program and almost 3 into deliveries and Airbus has delivered 52 airplanes.

Airbus have about 70 less ORDERS 11 years after program launch than Boeing had DELIVERIES in the roughly same time period.

And, contrary to hopeful speculation, no major additional orders for the A380 appear to be on the horizon.

Finally, in an odd twist of events, at least one Airbus Industrial partner, Germany, is limiting A380 access to their market from the major A380 customer in the Middle East. Thus, Europe is denying access to the A380 to the largest A380 purchaser.

Things hardly seem rosy.

[ThreeSpool]

Oh please, what a mish mash of arguments there Ship 741.

Modern day aircraft are far more complex than the first B747s coming off the line. Aircraft take longer these days, and there is a reason for that. Even the B787 has taken it's time getting into commercial service. You will see the same with the A350, and the B797. In fact, I think the last aircraft delivered on time was the B777, or was it the A330?

As for Germany and the A380, well it has nothing to do with the technical aspects of the aircraft but Germany protecting its own interest by not letting Emirates take over. Hardly the fault of the A380, wouldn't you say?

[Ship 741]

not really a mish mash. only 2: its very late and long overdue for a commercial program, and there are political "problems" besides.

I never asserted that the Germany thing was technical......I agree its political. But it certainly is an ironic twist in the saga of the A380, at least to me.

[ThreeSpool]

I am sure if Emirates had a fleet of B748s, that they were upgrading to from the B773 it would still be the same problem. That is, Emirates wanting more Germany market share than Germany is willing to give. At best, your point is moot.

Yes, it is late. It is not the first, and it'll not be the last.

[J Boyle]

I genuinely think the A380 needs a North American order; either United Air Lines or Delta Air Lines. Both are very unlikely.

What routes would they use them for?
Even on high traffic routes is seems airlines would rather have more frequent flights.
In the summer American flies two flights DFW to Gatwick.
The second airplane is a long paid for 767.
Likewise BA does two flights a day SEA-LHR in (again) long paid for 747-400s.
And two flights with different departure tiimes make a lot of sense in the US where customers are flying into the departure points from many distance cities. So as an example, someone leaving from Iowa and having to make two connecting flights to Dallas, a later, second departure makes a lot of sense.

In the off season, an airline would likely be faced with a lot of overcapity with a very expensive new aircraft to pay for.
The same rationale is probably the reason why 747-8 passenger sales are slow.

I'm not anti-A380, but it doesn't take a rocket science to predict there is a smaller market for mega transports than for 737/320s. I'd hope in the future rather than having two programs with (broadly) the same goals, that Boeing and Airbus would collaborate..t just makes sense for a very expensive program with a finite market.

[Bmused55]

Oh please, what a mish mash of arguments there Ship 741.

Modern day aircraft are far more complex than the first B747s coming off the line. Aircraft take longer these days, and there is a reason for that.

Pray tell, what be that reason?

The A380, 777, A350, A320, 737NG, A330/A340 A350 and all future aircraft to come were or will be designed using CAD software.

Yesterdays aircraft were all the bit as complex as todays.
Yesterdays aircraft were designed by the slide rule and the human brain and pure guesswork (no matter how educated the guess).
Todays electrical circuits are yesterdays control lines, pulleys and tensioners.
Todays electronic "glass" cockpit instruments are yesterdays steam gauges with miles and miles of wiring.

Fact is, the whole business of designing aircraft was every bit as complex then as it is now. Yet the manufacturers managed. The 747 was that complex and huge, it nigh on broke Boeing. It's complexity shows in it's longevity and adaptability.
And don't tell me the 737 family was an easy design either. For something to sell that long in those numbers, it had to be designed well and the complexity in that design shows. They're still tweaking it today.

The A380 was an organisational, too many chiefs and not enough indians, nightmare. The 787 exactly the same. I think it is far too early to judge the A350 and eventual 797.

The A380 may be rolling out the factory doors years after the last 747 will do, but you forget the 747 is 40 years older. You cannot compare them that way.

[Ship 741]

I am sure if Emirates had a fleet of B748s, that they were upgrading to from the B773 it would still be the same problem. That is, Emirates wanting more Germany market share than Germany is willing to give. At best, your point is moot.

Hey, that MAY be true if the planes were reversed, but it is not the case.

I just find it hugely ironic (and hilarious) that the A380's largest customer is being severely slot restricted by one of the Airbus partial owners (the German Government). Just imagine the sales flyer for future programs: "Buy our airplanes! Just don't fly them to our country! Or only fly them when, where, and how often WE decide." Ha! HaHa! Socialism....ain't it great?

[Ship 741]

The same rationale is probably the reason why 747-8 passenger sales are slow.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner.

The worldwide air transport market has been fragmenting for 20 years now. For example, between the U.S. and Europe, the traditional trans-Atlantic gateways of JFK and LHR are now routinely over-flown. There is much more point to point service. This is also happening in the Pacific, and will happen at a faster rate as China continues to grow and the 787 comes into service. Japan will be overflown. Japan will still have O&D, and it will still have a vibrant economy, it just won't as important a hub as it was in the past.

International route fragmentation was facilitated by the 767 and ETOPS. Boeing led the way. Airbus came along only reluctantly, and late at that. Witness the A340. Airbus followed the failure of the A340 by allowing their pride to govern their actions and developed the failed A380. If it was 1970, the A380 might work, but the rate at which markets are fragmenting virtually guarantees limited A380 sales. They might sell 1,000. Might. In the meantime thousands of 787's and A350's will be built. To say nothing of A330's and 777's. Boeing only built the 748 because it was easy. It was easy to develop from the 744, it was easy to ensure a few hundred sales, it was easy to steal a few hundred sales from the A380. Developed at a fraction of the cost of the A380 and practically ensuring market failure (never reaching breakeven) of the A380 was an easy decision for Boeing.

I don't love Boeing. I have no association with them. I think they do a lot of stupid things. But they took a huge gamble on ETOPS when they modified the 767s and when they built the 777 specifially for ETOPS, and they were right, and they followed it up with the 787, which was the right airplane, but they failed to deliver in a timely manner. ALPA was wrong about ETOPS. Airbus was wrong about ETOPS. Lufthansa was wrong about ETOPS. Boeing was right, the market changed forever, and it ain't changing back. Being right should still count for something.

While LHR bumbles about with NIMBY problems and fails to build another runway, and has raised taxes to an exorbitant level to pay for T5 (and further drive away connecting traffic), the Chinese have just announced plans to build an all-new airport for Beijing, with 8 (count 'em, 8) runways, to open by 2017. Thats right 2017, and they haven't even started yet, but it will probably be done.