Odds and Ends: Picking up an A380; testing the 787; VLA backlogs

Picking up an A380: No, it’s not about lifting one. It’s taking delivery of one. CNN International Travel has this story about the delivery process. It’s not what you’d think would be your usual story from a travel section.

Testing the 787: Since we started off with delivery of an Airbus, let’s continue with testing about the 787 with this piece from All Things 787.

A380, 747-8 backlogs soften: Well, Aviation Week says they are under siege. We wouldn’t quite go that far, but the article is more balancedthan the headline.

A320 GTF testing begins: Aviation Week has this story.

A350 first flight ‘not easy’: Fox News has this story in which Airbus acknowledges the first flight of the A350 by mid-2013 won’t be easy. Airbus is trying very hard, though: there’s a lot of pressure to have the airplane at the Paris Air Show.

A320neo vs 737 MAX: This story has a good summary of the battle between the two giant OEMs.

30 Comments on “Odds and Ends: Picking up an A380; testing the 787; VLA backlogs

  1. “The A380 was designed as a family of aircraft, and there was a plan to do a slightly larger version but from a market perspective we’re not in a hurry to do that. The time that it’s likely to come out is 2020.”

    First time I’ve heard any Airbus official even mention the possibility of an A380-900 in quite a while.

    • 2020? Boeing waited too long to stretch the 757 and 747. Time to harvest the CASM potential of the A380 platform by launching a stretch in2013.

      • Uwe :
        .. and some A380 purchase agreement made public before year end. Did Leahy retreat from his targets before or after sept. 2012?

        Before September 2012. I think around the time of Farnborough. The article posted by Scott also mentions that Leahy is in discussions about a significant order that is likely to be announced before year-end, alas probably only as an MoU.

  2. The market is drying up for VLA. If it was not for Emirates,the order book would be very slim. The airline business model has changed very much since the launch of the A380. The VLA has a place in aviation but its place is shrinking. The large twins are the airliner of choice and when the 777-9x comes on line, it will signal the end of many VLA sales.
    The large twins offer frequency,fitting at current airport terminal gates and taxiways with no need for costly airport make overs to accommodate a few of these very large aircraft.
    The large twins can also weather the economic up and down cycles which are common today.
    The A380 will sell a few more frames perhaps,but it will never be a money maker for airbus.

    • It’s very sad to see that there are 19 major airlines (not counting Emirates) who are clued out enough to order A380s (and not cancel them, either). You really should offer your consulting services to them to save them from bankruptcy.

    • I agree, steve. There will certainly continue to be a niche for VLAs in some fleets (BA, for example, due to their unique capacity issues at Heathrow). However, the overall paradigm is shifting away from the low-frequency flights into only the biggest hubs, which was largely dictated by the 747 being the only true long-range aircraft in existence until the 1980s. Now, dur to the prevalence of medium-capacity long-haul planes (A330, 777, 787), airlines are shifting far more towards higher flight frequencies and additional secondary cities.

      • Brian :
        However, the overall paradigm is shifting away from the low-frequency flights into only the biggest hubs, which was largely dictated by the 747 being the only true long-range aircraft in existence until the 1980s.

        Funny how the 747-400, EIS 1989, still managed to become the most successful of the 747 family.

        Brian :
        Now, dur to the prevalence of medium-capacity long-haul planes (A330, 777, 787), airlines are shifting far more towards higher flight frequencies and additional secondary cities.

        We’ve heard that chorus so many times before that I have no doubt that many people believe it.
        Firstly, there will always be routes that have sufficient traffic to sustain VLAs.
        Secondly, there will never be – for example – a direct flight PAD-JFK or ORK-NRT. Which means hub-spoke will not die, and thus, neither will the need for VLAs.
        Thirdly, it’s funny how how classify the 777 as medium-capacity when 40% of all 777s ever delivered (over 49% of all ever ordered) are -300(ER)s; particularly impressive considering that the -300ER didn’t EIS until 10 years after the original 777’s EIS. By 1980’s standards, the -300(ER) is a VLA. And yet it still sells. Quite well.
        Fourthly, look at how many conversions from the smaller 787-8 and A350-800 to the larger -9/-900 we are seeing. As well as how Boeing as well as Airbus aren’t selling too many A319neo/737-7MAX and at least Airbus trying to push the boundaries of how many people the A321neo can carry.

        While all of the above points aren’t sure-fire reasons to buy A380s in huge quantities (especially if there are A350-1000s, 777-300ERs and possibly 777-9X that have a couple fewer seats but also two fewer engines and a lower price tag), they do in my view at least illustrate that things aren’t all that black-and-white.
        Large and very large airplanes still play a significant role.
        Frequency over capacity is not something that can be sustained if air traffic is indeed going to grow at 4% annually over the next 20 years. Particularly with ever-increasing opposition to the expansion of existing and construction of new airports.
        Also, the hub – and thus the need for LA/VLA – is still very much alive, and I see no way this could change unless everybody starts flying their own aircraft so there is no longer a need to connect when intending to travel LEJ-GRU.

        In other words: “frequency over capacity” is largely marketing hogwash.

  3. Re: VLA’s

    I find it odd that the writers compare 747-8F to A380s. Its irrelevant.

    The -8F’s seems to have few competitors. The biggest competitors being a fleet of healthy, stored, or soon stored 747-400s waiting to be converted in China. Less efficient and way, way cheaper to acquire. And converted A340s later on.

    The only aircraft in trouble seems to be the 747-8i. If the writer finds EK having a third of the A380 backlog important fact they should not have left out LHs position in the 8i backlog.

  4. A date with history 17th/12/1903
    Lift off:Orville Wright pilots the first powered, contorolled and sustained flightin the ‘Wright Flyer while his brother Wilber watches.The pair suffered weeks of delays before their plane which was made from wood,wire and cloth, flew for 12 seconds and covered 36meters(120ft) at Kitty Hawk North Carolina.

  5. A380 is going a bit stale… I am certain Airbus needs to launch a refresh, be it -900, re engine or whatever other improvements they can find. Sales have stagnated and something needs doing. As far as 2020 is concerned, it is EIS they are talking about. It will be earlier, in my opinion…

    A350 first flight ‘not easy’. No it is not easy but Airbus is throwing enormous resources at the Program. I have a feeling they will achieve FF by the Airshow, what happens after that, of course, remains to be seen.

    • UKair :
      A380 is going a bit stale… I am certain Airbus needs to launch a refresh, be it -900, re engine or whatever other improvements they can find.

      I beg your pardon? A re-engine of an airplane that had its EIS only five (5!) years ago?
      It also appears you are not following the news very closely – RR already announced that examples of its Trent 900 had a 1% reduction in SFC; Airbus also stated they are continually improving the airplane (as also evident by the higher gross weight variants introduced over time). All this on an airplane that is already getting praise from its operators for its fuel efficiency.

      UKair :
      Sales have stagnated and something needs doing. As far as 2020 is concerned, it is EIS they are talking about. It will be earlier, in my opinion…

      The two biggest problems of the A380 currently – as stated by airlines as well as Airbus themselves – are a) being able to fill it in the current market climate and b) delivery slots.
      Neither would be addressed by an A380-900. On the contrary, and Airbus have explicitly stated that they don’t see sufficient demand for the -900. So I don’t see them in a hurry to launch that model and thus don’t see an EIS/first flight before 2020 (give or take a year).

      • Slight additition: The full sentence was supposed to read “RR already announced that examples of its Trent 900 delivered from 2012 had a 1% reduction in SFC”

      • “A re-engine of an airplane that had its EIS only five (5!) years ago?”
        And 7 years ago there was no TXWB in existence.

        “It also appears you are not following the news very closely”
        It may appear to you however I am acutely aware of what is happening on the A380 program.

        “Airbus also stated they are continually improving the airplane”
        Of course they are. What I had said does not contradict the above.
        Generally speaking I said that they should ‘refresh’ the offering through a combination of several available instruments. Improving their airframe, and driving CASM down, can be achieved either through vastly improved engines for a given airframe or stretching it for given engines + a range of various aero tidy ups. Given the various trades, the best option will be selected. Obviously the possibilities are endless.

        “All this on an airplane that is already getting praise from its operators for its fuel efficiency.”
        Amen to that.
        However in recent adverts Boeing does not agree with it 

        “On the contrary, and Airbus have explicitly stated that they don’t see sufficient demand for the -900”
        When did they say that? They have always been consistent that in the A380 they are planning a family of aircraft. -900 has always been on the agenda.

        “So I don’t see them in a hurry to launch that model and thus don’t see an EIS/first flight before 2020”
        No, they would not do it in a hurry, the working of various scenarios has been going on for a while.

      • UKair :
        “A re-engine of an airplane that had its EIS only five (5!) years ago?”
        And 7 years ago there was no TXWB in existence.

        You’ll find that not every airplane type gets re-engined every time a new engine generation comes about. In fact, most airplaine types don’t, and they still manage to sell reasonably well.
        Also note that the Trent 900 isn’t exactly inefficient or old technology, either.

        UKair :
        Generally speaking I said that they should ‘refresh’ the offering through a combination of several available instruments. […] Given the various trades, the best option will be selected. Obviously the possibilities are endless.

        They obviously are, and that’s why I don’t see a re-engine happening any time soon. There are many more options available to Airbus and IAE/RR that are a lot less costly and time-consuming.

        UKair :
        “On the contrary, and Airbus have explicitly stated that they don’t see sufficient demand for the -900”
        When did they say that? They have always been consistent that in the A380 they are planning a family of aircraft.

        Apologies – I should have phrased it more clearly.
        I meant to say “Airbus have explicitly stated that they don’t see sufficient demand for the -900 at this point.”
        Refer to the Airbus statement in my first response to Scott’s article for the exact quote.
        I meant to say this in response to your statement “As far as 2020 is concerned, it is EIS they are talking about. It will be earlier, in my opinion…” – i.e. I am saying that I don’t see EIS happening before 2020.
        Besides market demand, which Airbus says isn’t there at the moment (at least not enough of it), there is also the fact that Airbus still need to get the A350-900 and A320neo flying and delivered, the A400M delivered, and the A350-1000 finished and flying, all before the decade is out. Until at least two out of these four have a checkmark against them, I don’t see Airbus committing to developing an A380-900.

      • “You’ll find that not every airplane type gets re-engined every time a new engine generation comes about.”
        You had caught on to the word ‘re-engine’, which has several meanings to it. It maybe a transfer of some TXWB technologies or TXWB itself, either way engines will be looked at. There hasn’t been a more perfect fit though…
        http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/0/5/5/2087550.jpg

        “Trent 900 isn’t exactly inefficient”
        I didn’t say it wasn’t.

        “I don’t see a re-engine happening any time soon”
        Again, you caught on to one word. I said there are combination of options available. There wouldn’t be a just a straight re engine.

        “don’t see sufficient demand for the -900 at this point.”
        The plane will potentially be delivered in 6-7 years time… not now.

        “Besides market demand, which Airbus says isn’t there at the moment”
        Show me.

        “Airbus still need to get the A350-900 and A320neo flying and delivered, the A400M delivered, and the A350-1000”
        All of them are in different phases of design and production. You do not wait until delivering the last one of the above before going onto the new project.

        “I don’t see Airbus committing to developing an A380-900”
        This time next year you will see what happens and this is not necessarily about -900.

      • UKair :
        “You’ll find that not every airplane type gets re-engined every time a new engine generation comes about.”
        You had caught on to the word ‘re-engine’,

        Sorry, but that’s the term you used. I’m fully aware that there can be PIPs and other improvements introduced to the RR/IAE engines, as has been the case with pretty much every other engine. That’s not what’s commonly referred to as a “re-engine”, though, which implies that a completely new engine is introduced, a la 737MAX, A320neo, 707RE.

        UKair :
        “I don’t see a re-engine happening any time soon”
        Again, you caught on to one word. I said there are combination of options available. There wouldn’t be a just a straight re engine.

        Here’s what you said: “I am certain Airbus needs to launch a refresh, be it -900, re engine or whatever other improvements they can find.”
        I specifically disagreed with the -900 and the re-engine happening any time soon. I never disagreed with the suggestion that other improvement are being researched and will be implemented. In fact, I specifically said these will be explored before Airbus are going to look at the rather costly and time-consuming option of re-engining the airplane.

        UKair :
        “don’t see sufficient demand for the -900 at this point.”
        The plane will potentially be delivered in 6-7 years time… not now.

        Please re-read my statements. They were in reference to sufficient demand and engineering resources to launch the -900 in 2013 for a pre-2020 EIS.

        UKair :
        “Besides market demand, which Airbus says isn’t there at the moment”
        Show me.

        As mentioned before, please see the quote in my first comment. To save you having to scroll up:
        “The A380 was designed as a family of aircraft, and there was a plan to do a slightly larger version but from a market perspective we’re not in a hurry to do that. The time that it’s likely to come out is 2020.” (Highlight introduced by me.)

        UKair :
        “Airbus still need to get the A350-900 and A320neo flying and delivered, the A400M delivered, and the A350-1000
        All of them are in different phases of design and production. You do not wait until delivering the last one of the above before going onto the new project.

        If you would care to quote my full statement, I never said that they have to finish all four projects before committing to a new A380 version: “there is also the fact that Airbus still need to get the A350-900 and A320neo flying and delivered, the A400M delivered, and the A350-1000 finished and flying, all before the decade is out. Until at least two out of these four have a checkmark against them, I don’t see Airbus committing to developing an A380-900.”
        That also provides some context to the last part of the sentence, which you quoted without said context later on.

        UKair :
        This time next year you will see what happens and this is not necessarily about -900.

        So you agree with what I’m saying, that the -900 won’t be launched in 2013?
        Just to be clear: I never doubted Airbus could do other things with the A380, as they have continually done so far.

      • “Sorry, but that’s the term you used.”
        I have already explained to you what I meant…
        “Generally speaking I said that they should ‘refresh’ the offering through a combination of several available instruments.”
        … those instruments are: stretch (be it 825, 850, 875 or 900), engine improvement and aero tidy ups. They will select the best overall package and I strongly believe that when it come to the engines, they will either introduce significant upgrade in technology or hang TXWB. I hope it is clear now.

        “I specifically disagreed with the -900 and the re-engine happening any time soon. I never disagreed with the suggestion that other improvement are being researched and will be implemented.”
        What is the point of researching improvements without having an idea of the future development of the product? You are again making the mistake separating the elements Airbus has at hand…

        ““The A380 was designed as a family of aircraft, and there was a plan to do a slightly larger version but from a market perspective we’re not in a hurry to do that. The time that it’s likely to come out is 2020.”
        My view is that it will be end of 2018/mid 2019.

        “That also provides some context to the last part of the sentence, which you quoted without said context later on.”
        I quoted exactly the point I addressed in that you do not wait until all programs are performing before launching something else. Otherwise the resource involved in the early part of the design will be doing nothing.

        “So you agree with what I’m saying, that the -900 won’t be launched in 2013?”
        Let me summarise one more time: Airbus will have refresh the A380, otherwise it will die a slow death. It maybe a -850, -875 or -900 with upgraded engines + other improvements. What I suggest is that by the end of next year there will be news on that front, because I see Airbus introducing this refreshed version before the end of the decade. In order to do that they must launch it in 2014. You have your view, I have mine – we do not seem to converge.

        And just to fix the link in my previous post…
        http://www.airliners.net/photo/Airbus-Industrie/Airbus-A380-841/2087550/L/&sid=48aa71ba96f16e0407ba96c87c2ae3d3

  6. Emirates repeatedly stated their interest in a A380-900 and CX Tyler also stated they wanted more capasity and/or range. I can imagine several of the low density A380 operators too would convert frames for their top Asian destinations and flying to/between places like LHR, LAX, CDG, HkG and JFK that are both hubs and major destinations

  7. anfromme :
    Slight additition: The full sentence was supposed to read “RR already announced that examples of its Trent 900 delivered from 2012 had a 1% reduction in SFC”

    Airbus improvements though significant seem to gain less visibility.
    The difference is that Boeing pushes one set of improvements over a range of years
    in repeating waves into the press wilderness keeping the impression of “freshness”
    and taken up with fervor.
    On the other hand it is astonishing in what nooks and crannies Airbus bashing articles spring up. Wording oftentimes so identical that they must have been provided with a cheatsheet
    and some benefits from using them.

    • I have to say Uwe, I tend to agree with your observation about Airbus bashing articles. There are a few bloggers I could mention, whom I have suspicions must be getting some kind of financial reward.

  8. UKair :
    “A re-engine of an airplane that had its EIS only five (5!) years ago?”
    And 7 years ago there was no TXWB in existence.
    “It also appears you are not following the news very closely”
    It may appear to you however I am acutely aware of what is happening on the A380 program.
    ……..
    ….
    “So I don’t see them in a hurry to launch that model and thus don’t see an EIS/first flight before 2020”
    No, they would not do it in a hurry, the working of various scenarios has been going on for a while.

    I think by the end of the decade the market is ready for an A380 Enhanced. Offering more capacity and payload-range. RR is working towards new engine technology that would be technology ready by that time. E.g Carbon-Titanium fan blades are back on the agenda (after they nearly killed RR 50 (!#$!) years ago..

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/rolls-royce-comes-full-circle-362251/
    http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7045/6977683645_244af2508f_z.jpg

    • Enhanced is exactly the word for it. As I said above let’s wait till this time next year…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *