Airbus 380

Page 3 of 32<123456>Last »
September 10th, 2014 at 7:04:18 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 301
Posts: 9766
It would see wide-body jets are an endangered species, or that older wide-bodies are kept flying longer.

The latter makes sense for planes used in long routes. Though they fly a great deal, they take off and land less often than a regional jet logging similar hours per day.

I wonder, though, whether we'll see development in the next 30-40 years of single-aisle, long range, mid-size long-haul aircraft? It hardly seems likely. I can sit for 4+ hours, with one or two trips to the lavatory (if that). But I can't imagine sitting like that for 5-12 hours. The longest flight I ever took was Tel-Aviv to NYC, about 12 hours or so, in a 747. I spent perhaps 1/3 of the time out of my seat.

Of course, the airlines could do something revolutionary. Imagine a slightly longer A-320/B-737 type of plane with seating of 4 per row, two seats on each side, and a wider aisle. That might make long, long trips bearable. But then such designs would lack the fuel for doing, say MEX-Paris non-stop. And I don't care how much flexibility the airlines want, adding a stop costs a ton of money in fuel.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
September 10th, 2014 at 9:48:56 AM permalink
boymimbo
Member since: Mar 25, 2013
Threads: 5
Posts: 610
It won't happen. Airlines are steadily taking away amenities and charging for everything else. Domestic was very quick to degrade due to competition and deregulation, but overseas flights generally have higher standards of comfort and free meals to compete with the international carriers.

I do look at equipment when I fly. I prefer wide-body 2-3-2 configurations when travelling with my wife with us taking a Window-Aisle. We prefer larger planes over smaller ones. We detest regionals with under 50 seats and turboprops (Dash 8s). So equipment to me is a big factor when choosing travel.
September 10th, 2014 at 10:15:17 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 636
Posts: 7249
Historical Record for longest regularly scheduled commercial pre-widebody flight.
10,100 km August 1967, Aerolineas Argentinas (12 hr) : Madrid <=> Buenos Aires on a Boeing 707.

This commercial flight began about 1.5 years before 11. Apr 1969 the first 747 was delivered to Pan Am.

Distance
9,190 km Mexico City to Paris
5,860 km New York City to Paris

We talked about the single aisle Boeing 757 which was basically an updated Boeing 707. They use the B757 to go from NYC to Paris (usually 169 seats). But there is no way it could make it from Mexico City to Paris. The single aisle jets could never handle the distance and the "hot and high" conditions of MC.

The longest scheduled flight on a single aisle jet today for three major classes of narrow-bodies
6,648 km B757 Pisa to New York-JFK 09 hr 40 min on Delta Air Lines DL:247
6,796 km B737-700ER Tokyo to Mumbai 09 hr 35 min on All Nippon Airways NH:943
5,245 km Airbus A319-100 Doha to London-Heathrow 07 hr 25 min Qatar Airways QR:15

7,100 km Advertised range of 737-Max 7, but the advertised range is usually under such favorable circumstances that actual commercial flights are far less.

10,425 km Theoretical max range of B737-700ER with the option of all nine auxiliary fuel tanks, giving it a maximum fuel capacity of 40,530 liters (up from the standard 26,020 liters). This option is usually only considered for business jets, as it means you don't have to purchase a widebody, but you want the range to go well across the Atlantic. The cost of fuel per person means that it isn't a consideration for commercial flight.

===========
There is a one way flight from London's City airport on a single aisle jet. It flies to Shannon airport in Ireland where you clear American customs. Then when you land in JFK you can bypass crowded customs and go right to your limousine. Only 32 flatbed seats and all the expensive goodies you can eat or drink. Price is equivalent of 50,000 Mexican pesos (one way).

But I've been upgraded to business class to Europe (one time). but you must fly about 100,000 km per year to get in that category.
September 10th, 2014 at 11:28:20 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 636
Posts: 7249
Quote: boymimbo
I do look at equipment when I fly. I prefer wide-body 2-3-2 configurations when travelling with my wife with us taking a Window-Aisle. We prefer larger planes over smaller ones. We detest regionals with under 50 seats and turboprops (Dash 8s). So equipment to me is a big factor when choosing travel.


The summer of 2003 is the last time a USA airline took delivery of jet with 2-3-2 configuration. As they are still making a cargo version of that plane, they have revived limited number of passenger versions for LAN Chile. The last one was for an airline in Kazakhstan at the end of June 2014. Right now there are no future orders for passenger version.

Passengers obviously like that the 2-3-2 only has one middle seat per row. Presumably if you fill the middle with families, almost no adults have to sit in a middle seat. But from the airlines point of viewer it is much more sensible to go with a low cost 3-3 configuration or a 3-4-3 for coach.

Flexible seating would allow lucky people to make proper use of the lack of a passenger in the middle seat. Airlines (of course) are hoping to sell these seats as an option, and not just give away the inches.



The Middle East airlines are getting more and more luxurious
September 11th, 2014 at 6:05:30 AM permalink
terapined
Member since: Aug 6, 2014
Threads: 34
Posts: 2501
Just got a message from BA regarding new A380 service.
Starting Mar 29 2015, BA will fly an A380 SFO to LHR rt 5 days a week.
Alot of competition on this route, UA and VS also fly nonstop.
SFO a UA hub so my SFO clients will probabbly ask for UA instead of BA, miles and corp discount on UA business class.
Sometimes we live no particular way but our own - Grateful Dead "Eyes of the World"
September 11th, 2014 at 7:42:04 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 636
Posts: 7249
Quote: terapined
SFO a UA hub so my SFO clients will probably ask for UA instead of BA, miles and corp discount on UA business class.


Star Alliance, Sky Team, or One World. Do you find most of your clients are in SA, or one of the other two?
September 11th, 2014 at 8:29:12 AM permalink
terapined
Member since: Aug 6, 2014
Threads: 34
Posts: 2501
Quote: Pacomartin
Star Alliance, Sky Team, or One World. Do you find most of your clients are in SA, or one of the other two?


Mostly Star Alliance, UA is aggresive in offering corp discounts for increased business and discounts apply to LH
Some Sky Team, DL is also aggressive in offering corp discounts for increased business and discounts apply to KL and AF
Very little One World. AA not agressive in offerring corp discounts.

Most of my clients are in the central part of USA so main airport I use for international Travel is ORD.
Use east coast hubs if travelling to Europe or India.
Rarely use west coast hubs.
Sometimes we live no particular way but our own - Grateful Dead "Eyes of the World"
September 11th, 2014 at 9:31:34 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 636
Posts: 7249
Quote: terapined
Most of my clients are in the central part of USA so main airport I use for international Travel is ORD.
Use east coast hubs if travelling to Europe or India.Rarely use west coast hubs.


While Chicago (ORD) is United's Second biggest domestic hub (behind Houston, the former continental hub), it's basically in a tie for 4th place with IAD for United's international traffic.

2013 Origin International Passengers United Airlines

3,488,634 Newark
2,701,358 Houston
1,556,075 San Francisco (SFO)
1,363,239 Chicago ORD
1,343,810 Washington DC (IAD)
220,855 Denver
...
556,014 Los Angeles
106,620 Honolulu
628,981 Guam
116,692 other (Cleveland, etc)


UA does 80% of it's domestic business flying between it's 6 hubs and 8 other airports LAS, BOS, MCO, SEA, HNL, SAN, CLE, and LGA. It keeps losing money on domestic business. One day I think that they will give up their domestic business and hire Southwest to bring them passengers for their international flights from most airports (like they do with United Express companies).
September 12th, 2014 at 11:28:41 PM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 46
Posts: 3795
For eons now, airplane orders have been illusory. Delivery slots are traded, confirmed, re-confirmed, revoked, whatever.

Aerobus particularly seems to sell "headlines about delivery" not airplanes that actually will be delivered. Everyone seems to know that its just the manufacturers who seem to believe the hype.

Governmental involvement seems to make Aerobus planes similar to cell phones....one cent for the phone, umpteen hundred a month for the contract plan. Only with aerobus its more likely to be fuel contracts or currency deals. Or else its One New/Two Old kept off the market.

Few think Qantas will recover. Its pilots are now back to the Burger Flipper types from other nations.

I'm astounded international travel has survived the effect of virtual meetings.

Sure airlines make commitments relating to spare parts and terminals but it seems more and more of it is illusory
September 13th, 2014 at 3:42:54 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 636
Posts: 7249
Quote: Fleastiff
For eons now, airplane orders have been illusory. Delivery slots are traded, confirmed, re-confirmed, revoked, whatever.


In particular that statement seems true about the A380. Just ramping the production line up to 30 per year, and then dropping it back down to 24 per year must have been costly.

Airbus advertises 178 A380's on order of which 88 are to Emirates. But if you read the financial reports most of those "orders" seem like they will never happen (including the 8 to Qantas).

Emirates has made it clear that they won't be ordering anymore A380's unless there is a substantial redesign to improve fuel efficiency. They have orders for over 200 B777's on the books and are in talks with Boeing on the next generation of widebody.

On the other hand, Airbus seems to be wildly successful with single aisle jets.
Page 3 of 32<123456>Last »