Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That leaves what, Emriates as the sole and largest buyer/owner of the A380, how does that work out.
Qantas received A380s on the following dates
19. Sep. 2008
15. Dec. 2008
27. Dec. 2008
22. Aug. 2009
19. Dec. 2009
7. Jan. 2010
16. Dec. 2010
13. Jan. 2011
31. Jan. 2011
8. Apr. 2011
25. Nov. 2011
15. Dec. 2011
Those last 8 A380s on order have been delayed for years now. The official cancellation simply confirmed reality. There actually is another 23 imaginary orders on the books to Amadeo and AIR ACCORD. They are just trying to close the books before ending the program.
Last edited by PacoMartin; 02-08-2019 at 07:12 AM..
The A380 was never really viable in the first place. I don't think that even Airbus themselves really believes the PR hype and BS about "relieving congestion" the way this thing was originally pitched.
It was built for one reason and one reason only:
To be big for the sake of big, to wrest that title from Boeing. While the A380 is/was a total flop from a sales and financial perspective, it was still a huge symbolic victory of national pride and status, which was what really mattered.
Airbus will lose big time. They totally misread the direction of the aviation industry, and it shows.
A big part of the problem is the infrastructure changes that it takes to accommodate the A380, which severely limits the destinations that it can serve. Example: I live in Las Vegas. An airline that doesn't currently serve the city (rumor is that it is QANTAS) inquired about flying the A380 here. The airport authority researched what it would take in order to accommodate it. The estimate was that the city would have to make $650M worth of upgrades. For a few flights a week, the city decided that it wasn't worth the investment.
Two A380 operators (British Airways and Korean Air) do fly here, but with different aircraft. Korean flies Boeing 777s, and British flies 777s and 747s.
A big part of the problem is the infrastructure changes that it takes to accommodate the A380, which severely limits the destinations that it can serve. Example: I live in Las Vegas. An airline that doesn't currently serve the city (rumor is that it is QANTAS) inquired about flying the A380 here. The airport authority researched what it would take in order to accommodate it. The estimate was that the city would have to make $650M worth of upgrades. For a few flights a week, the city decided that it wasn't worth the investment.
Two A380 operators (British Airways and Korean Air) do fly here, but with different aircraft. Korean flies Boeing 777s, and British flies 777s and 747s.
I believe ORD, DFW, and possibly IAH and MCO built A380 compatible gates. I know that BA only flew the A380 to ORD during the past summer.
I’m not sure that Vegas has enough international tourism for to justify updating the gates. Qantas is receiving more 787s. If they are serious about starting flights, then they will do it without the A380. BA is phasing out the 747 and will be replacing them with 777s and A350s. Non of these planes require special gates as far as I know.
Qantas is receiving more 787s. If they are serious about starting flights, then they will do it without the A380. BA is phasing out the 747 and will be replacing them with 777s and A350s. Non of these planes require special gates as far as I know.
They don't. The airport here regularly serves 777s and A330s, along with the occasional 747 (British Airways and Virgin Atlantic). Hainan Airways and Norwegian both fly the 787 here. I haven't seen an A350 here yet, but I'm sure that it wouldn't be an issue.
The A380 was never really viable in the first place. I don't think that even Airbus themselves really believes the PR hype and BS about "relieving congestion" the way this thing was originally pitched.
It was built for one reason and one reason only:
To be big for the sake of big, to wrest that title from Boeing. While the A380 is/was a total flop from a sales and financial perspective, it was still a huge symbolic victory of national pride and status, which was what really mattered.
You can do things like that when you can get several hundred million taxpayers to subsidize you.
The A380 was never really viable in the first place. I don't think that even Airbus themselves really believes the PR hype and BS about "relieving congestion" the way this thing was originally pitched.
It was built for one reason and one reason only:
To be big for the sake of big, to wrest that title from Boeing. While the A380 is/was a total flop from a sales and financial perspective, it was still a huge symbolic victory of national pride and status, which was what really mattered.
Well, at the time, they were looking at traffic to/from major hub airports like LHR and NRT which have runway capacity constraints - hence the use of large aircraft. JAL had the largest 747 fleet in the world at one time, and later BA did. This business model fits Emirates very well to a tee, and it's not surprising that they're the biggest A380 operator. The problem is that it doesn't work very well for most other carriers.
The Japanese carriers, such as JAL and ANA, diversified away from their Narita hub with the growth of flights from Haneda. In addition, the JAL bankruptcy led JAL to ditch their 747s early and opt for smaller capacity aircraft with lower break even points such as the 777.
What Airbus didn't bet on was the development of point to point direct flights with smaller aircraft - which Boeing bet on with the 787 program.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
