[cwoodward]

Of course although the A380 has more nominal capacity, as a freighter the extra space is largely unusable as the aircraft is unable to cope with the extra weight of a full freight loading. There are also several other more technical deficiencies.
Unless for a specialised purpose that involves lightweight cargo the A3800 makes a very poor freighter.

[AMcWhirter]

I shall be interested to see LH Tecknik’s A380 conversion.

A380 superjumbo modified for passenger-cargo use

[AMcWhirter]

Just announced via Reuters … Qatar Airways will keep its A380s grounded “until at least mid to late June 2021” says the CEO.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-qatar-airways/dont-resist-order-deferrals-qatar-airways-tells-jetmakers-idUKKBN2391FA

[Johnnyg]

[postquote quote=999880][/postquote]

10 A380’s on the ground for another 12 months is a bit of a hit as the oldest was only delivered in Sept 2014 but with other airlines getting rid of theirs the second hand market I should imagine is through the floor.

[AMcWhirter]

Earlier it was mentioned that SIA was parking A380s at Alice Springs (Australia).

But as I thought only a proportion of the A380 fleet is being stored there. If this tweet is correct some have gone to the US.

All 19 #A380 are due to return to service @SingaporeAir spokesman tells me now. Currently the fleet is parked in Alice Springs and some in the US, he said. Any details anyone of where in the US? Photo Steve Strike #avgeek pic.twitter.com/jNMEhF2hor

— Andreas Spaeth (@SpaethFlies) June 25, 2020

[Terence]

Why do you think this is fantastic news? With the demise of the Boeing 747 because of the age of aircraft, that only leaves the A340 and the A380 and if both of these aircraft types disappear from the sky, air fares on many routes will increase when airlines have to use smaller aircraft.

[cwoodward]

Singapore Airlines parked 5 more aircraft at Alice Springs a few days ago.
2 more A380 and 3 Dreamliners according to AU reports.

[Swissdiver]

Filling up large long haul planes will take time. So I guess the B787s alike will be the first back in operation while the four engines’ might never come back…

[Woodpecker]

Similar to the Concorde, the A380 was ahead of its time. Nothing wrong whatsoever with the aircraft, not a single crash. It’s just that first the economic downturn & now the covid virus have taken their toll on this giant.

I love the aircraft, and can’t wait to get back on one. There must be a reason airlines are moth balling them rather than sending them to the scrapyard.

What’s to say that a decade or two later people will be nostalgic to travel on the A380, the same way we feel about the Boeing 747 today.

7 users thanked author for this post.

K1ngston, Frederic, IanFromHKG, ASK1945, AMcWhirter, tomwjsimpson, DerekVH

[MartynSinclair]

[quote quote=1003472]Similar to the Concorde, the A380 was ahead of its time.[/quote]

Similar to Concorde, both never managed to infiltrate the USA airline market. Concorde was banned from overflying the USA at full speed and not one USA airline purchased a 380…

[Swissdiver]

Not quite. Concorde was a great plane, that failed commercially because indeed the USA were protectionist. The A380 is a massive strategic mistake from Airbus and had no chance to generate any form of return on investment. And without the surreal Emirates orders, it would have failed much earlier. Boing was right. The future is point to point, not hub to hub.

[AMcWhirter]

[postquote quote=1003478][/postquote]

Martyn – another fact was that Concorde had range only for the US East Coast / Caribbean.

When it operated with AF to Rio it had to make a fuel stop in West Africa. When it operated that JV BA/SQ flight to Singapore it stopped in the Gulf … and it would be subsonic LHR-BAH so supersonic only for BAH-SIN.

It was a similar story with the VC-10. In terms of passenger appeal and performance (take off and landing at high altitudes) it too was ahead of its time.

But it didn’t sell in the US because it’s maximum range was LON-ORD … crucially the VC-10 could not operate Europe to US West Coast non-stop.

So when BOAC operated its VC-10s to the US West Coast they had to route via NYC. Yes BOAC did operate to the West Coast non-stop but then it deployed a B707.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Swissdiver, Woodpecker, MartynSinclair

[Swissdiver]

Alex,
Thanks.
While I can understand the short range of the Concorde (lack of room), what explains such a design mistake for the VC-10?

[AMcWhirter]

Swissdiver – Check out this video. Right from the beginning it explains why the VC-10 failed to be a sales success.

It doesn’t explain the lack of range (compared to the B707 and DC-8 and especially the later 62 series) but it may because the VC-10 was designed for airfield performance rather than range.

3 users thanked author for this post.

cwoodward, Swissdiver, IanFromHKG

[canucklad]

[quote quote=1003478]Similar to Concorde, both never managed to infiltrate the USA airline market. Concorde was banned from overflying the USA at full speed and not one USA airline purchased a 380…[/quote]

And no way to prove political pressure shenanigans to protect the home market .
Plus, the operating airlines really let themselves down by not taking advantage of the space the 380 afforded to them .
Is LH “y” on a 380 so much different to UA “Y” on the FRA -LAX flights ? Nope
Same can be said for most of the operators.
Apparently back in the day , people actually went out their way to request VC10 flights, doubt anybody did that with the 380.

The airline execs of the 380 , have sadly demonstrated the creative thinking of a 1970’s bank manager , dooming their investment and our (especially in Y”) comfort to failure

[Author]

Posts