Archive > Technical discussions

Airbus A380 in EHM fleet?

<< < (2/5) > >>

EHM-1730 Geoffrey:
I guess the A380 can still be classified under class 7 in future since it's meant to be the boeing 747 competitor? :o

EHM-1651 Christian:
Well i think the intentions with building the A380 was not to make these long flights but offer an higher pax capasety on routes to allow the airlines to reduce the longhauls fleets if you can fly 1,5 B744 in one flight you save fuel and recuse traffic in the sky, many places airspace i already overcrowded.  i got an shorter range by the A345 but it's not an product aimed just for the LR market.

EHM-1703 Philip:
Christian,

I would beg to differ. From what I have read, and with an aircraft that requires that much thrust to get off the ground and climbing, it would definately not be viable on short or most medium haul routes. From what I have seen it is not aimed at these markets, but squarely as a replacement for 747's on intercontinental routes. All of Airbuses comparisons are with the 747-400, and you don't see many of those flying Heathrow to Amsterdam or Zurich to Athens on a regular schedule. Also you have to note that limitations of airports regarding runway length and the boarding restrictions of the A380 coupled with the fact that there only 149 on the order books (27 of which are freight variants) this will mean it will probably not be used for medium range work for quite some time if ever.  

I personally don't think you will see the A380 on anything less than 5 hour flights in the real world but ofcourse we will have to wait and see. If larger capacity is required on shorter routes I think this will be the work of 787-300 carrying 330 Pax with a 3500nm range. It is squarely pitched at the coast to coast US Domestic Market and also with the rumoured halt in production of the 767 next year, this will be it's direct replacement which is the current work horse of most major US Domestic Carriers on the coast to coast routes. There is also the A350-800 which will be 300 pax capacity but a range of up to 7500nm will also be a consideration for this type of market.

That's just my Humble opinion though. Cheers

EHM-1001 Robert:
I think, I agree with Phil. Although the A380 was presented as a competitor to the Jumbo, but really it is only a competition in size. It is no question, A380 won that trophy. But to operate it efficiently, it really needs to fly long distances. But, if Airbus would improve the plane and release a domestic version, like the 747-400D, it would be really a competitor too in the domestic ranges and market.

EHM-1651 Christian:
Well I didn't make have in mind the use of the A380 as an mediumrange replacer, but with an max pax of 850 flying it on routes around 4-5 in a one class version will maybe be economic but not very likly because of the higher airportfees that it probably will have because of the changes to terminals and runways and taxiways.
What i tried to rule out in my last statement was that the A380 is not only intended as an longrange aircraft but prpbably is most likely to be used on the routes today wich make use of B744 and A33x A34x type of aircafts, on transcontinental and intercontinetal routes.

But with the economic side if you use the A380 on a flight from London to New York you get an extra cargoallloance when not having to use it full fuelcapasity. Wich gives an extra income oppertunity for those carriers who operates combined flights with  cargo pallets in the belly.
But if Airbus statments that it has an lower seatcost per mile than the B744 it must be more economic to fly even on shorter routes but you get an higher loss if you can't fill up the plane, so it has to be used on high densety routes onranges from 3500-8000nm i think:-)
:%:%:%:o

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page