Aer Lingus A380

robertxxx

Since aer lingus don't have a 747 anymore, would there be any demand for a A380 for the US and Malaga run? Could Dublin even handel one.

Strumms

Ask yourself this.. you almost answered you own question within the question... Since Aer Lingus don't have a 747 any more and since they chose to make a commercial decision to replace their transatlantic fleet of that time with the A330 and since they are adding capacity with a smaller aircraft again shortly ie. The 757.. Basic logic would indicate their is no need for the A380 in the EI fleet on any route. Their are no parking stands at Dublin that can handle the aircraft.. As regards the taxiways I am open to correction by anyone but I am sure they are not suitable either for the 380 ...

Peregrine

robertxxx wrote: »

Since aer lingus don't have a 747 anymore, would there be any demand for a A380 for the US and Malaga run? Could Dublin even handel one.

No and not at the moment. It can take in A380s for an emergency but not for normal operations.

There are no 747s in EI's fleet since the 90s for a reason.

keith16

Pity, would love to see that monster decked out in the green and white.

belcampprisoner

they cant even fill the small planes to America,the irish market is too small,,

http://planes.findthebest.com/q/242/7735/How-long-of-a-runway-does-the-Airbus-A380-800-Jet-need-to-take-off

keith16

belcampprisoner wrote: »

they cant even fill the small planes to America,the irish market is too small,,

http://planes.findthebest.com/q/242/7735/How-long-of-a-runway-does-the-Airbus-A380-800-Jet-need-to-take-off

hmmm....A330 isn't exactly small. Flights always seem fairly full when I'm on them. You're right tho, the A380 would probably be too big.

Unless they operated one flight a day (to NY for example)?? Might have overall increased operating costs however?

Strumms

By offering less frequency on the route you offer less options to your customers. The only people who would benefit in that case would be your competition. Operating an A330 with say a 757 daily would still come in a hell of a lot cheaper then operating one a380 across the Atlantic. And that's even before you factor in the maintenance costs... extra crews and many other associated costs.. It's just too much aeroplane for the airline and the routes it serves so it won't happen period...

GTE

Strumms wrote: »

Ask yourself this.. you almost answered you own question within the question... Since Aer Lingus don't have a 747 any more and since they chose to make a commercial decision to replace their transatlantic fleet of that time with the A330 and since they are adding capacity with a smaller aircraft again shortly ie. The 757.. Basic logic would indicate their is no need for the A380 in the EI fleet on any route ...

For heavens sake, there is no need for the attitude displayed in this post. Community forum, its a perfectly valid question.

The OP raises an interesting point for debate at the very least. Dub airports ability to handle it aside, one very big aircraft serving the same number of passengers with less frequencies could open Aer Lingus to a more long haul destinations with essentially the same amount of aircraft.

However with that, could passengers get more annoyed at less flights per week? If there is still "equal treatment" for long haul routes between Dublin and Shannon, that would probably cause more problems. Then, how long would it take to implement? Getting the 757s going seems to take ages. In the time, could it be just quicker to get some used A330s and the likes?

With Emirates likely to add a second Dublin flight, I wonder would it be in the scope of Aer Lingus to make use of the Etihad stake and have an Aer Lingus plane share the route if things get busier still. A massive speculative comment I admit. It was a pity Aer Lingus pulled out of Dubai the way they did (recession).

Strumms

Bkk, It's a completely valid question which is why I thought I'd throw a little light all be it in some detail for the benefit of the OP or whoever else.. Attitude ? Seriously ? Dude take off the tinfoil hat if you have a problem with the post report it, end of, moving on...

I don't ever recall the transatlantic routes being this competitive. The key is keeping costs down and providing levels of flexibility and of choice for the consumer .. I think you'd see 3 757s to JFK out of DUB long before you will ever see the return of a 747 or A380 but hey thts just my opinion.

Jamie2k9

they cant even fill the small planes to America,the irish market is too small,,

http://planes.findthebest.com/q/242/...ed-to-take-off

There T/A load factor is 85% on average with them achiving over 90% over a number of months last year. The B757's are for SNN and the other one is for DUB but I expect it will operate very few of the current flights from DUB in the summer and may even end up on some European routes and kept for tech problems with the 2 in SNN. At most it will operate some T/A in Jan and Feb but I can't see anything else unless they add some extra's to MCO for peak summer (if its in range) or the rumoured YYZ service.

EI will never have the A380's. They have the A350's coming from 2016-19 that will be the largest they will go IMO.

donvito99

EI buying A380s would be like Shamrock Rovers building the Maracana stadium in Tallaght.

Bessarion

bbk wrote: »

For heavens sake, there is no need for the attitude displayed in this post. Community forum, its a perfectly valid question.

The OP raises an interesting point for debate at the very least. Dub airports ability to handle it aside, one very big aircraft serving the same number of passengers with less frequencies could open Aer Lingus to a more long haul destinations with essentially the same amount of aircraft.

With Emirates likely to add a second Dublin flight, I wonder would it be in the scope of Aer Lingus to make use of the Etihad stake and have an Aer Lingus plane share the route if things get busier still. A massive speculative comment I admit. It was a pity Aer Lingus pulled out of Dubai the way they did (recession).

I didn't think there was any attitude in the response from strumms. He merely pointed out that the answer was in front of the OP by the way he asked the question.

Anyway, this discussion took place very recently here. A380 needs 9000ft for max take off weight. DUB runway is 8600ft, so any A380 operation would be restricted. (This issue also restricts B773's...hence the proposed new runway was to be >10000ft) A380 can land at DUB but the taxiways and stands are not currently designed to accommodate this aircraft. So pretty much zero chance of a scheduled A380 route.

While I agree that purely on numbers, EI do move enough pax per day to utilise an A380. However no airline would invest in a single aircraft of such size. In addition the multiple departures that EI offer is part of the reason that they are filling their aircraft. People like flexibility of travel. ie Dublin based can fill the early New York/Boston/Chicago while the later departures can pick-up passengers who arrive in on EI shorthauls flights from Europe/UK.

And just because you are getting 80% load on 2 A330's doesn't automatically mean you will transfer all those pax to an A380. What happens when EI buy the A380 ($390M?) and suddenly they find that all those European based pax start flying with someone else?

To answer some of the questions raised by bkk:

Yes it seems that the B757's are taking ages to arrive. But you do not just knock on the door of a dealership and walk away with used B757's. (Aircraft usually don't sit on forecourts with signs on them)
Firstly EI have to evaluate such a big fleet decision.
-They look at their own costs/revenue, they look at how the B757 could alter their operation, they look at the product offered by the competition.
-They look for possible 2nd hand B757's. No point getting dodgy ones!!
-Maybe they had to wait for the 3 they are getting to finish up their lease with Finnair?
-They then have to cut a deal with the leasing company.
-Then the big decisions....who flys them? who operates inside of them? who maintains them? Do we use our license or get another airline to do it for us?
-Then they decide when to use them. No point getting them now,when they are not planned in the schedule until early 2014. Airlines plan aircraft rotations months in advance,you cannot just change in 3 months. EI could possibly get them flying over the Winter but isn't that the worst time, better to wait till the low season is over before introducing a new operation.



As for your other point about the Middle East......the recession didn't kill the EI DUB-DXB route......EI senior mgmt killed that route.
DUB-DXB was a golden route and EI dropped the ball. The then CEO refused all advice/suggestions from staff groups on how the route was failing........
EI entered a premium market with a low cost business model. They had bad timings into Dubai that didn't line up with the EK departure waves. In addition they had no interline let alone codeshare deals set up. So the whole advantage of flying into DXB (the hub of Emirates) was squandered. People who were connecting had to overnight there and have a separate ticket booked on EK. Anecdotally I have been told that on the inaugural flight EI didn't even use their newest aircraft which had PTV's.....this simple detail shows how inept the then EI Exec team were.

As for operating to AUH in partnership with EY...I think it is a sound idea. And very much in line with the current EY operation. The EI aircraft are now upgraded and while not equal to EY are not too far behind. However to be honest I feel a better option would be for EI to carry more pax to North America, allow EY to get them to Dublin and go onwards with EI.


http://www.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00009271.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/search/photo_search.php?id%3D00009271&h=764&w=1024&sz=616&tbnid=g8_HVmjvDXEgBM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=130&zoom=1&usg=__zo2quxT-dddW7JxgSmXRk4F_oG4=&docid=EJbcFe9XL10NiM&sa=X&ei=Z76IUYu5KMzX7AblvIG4Cw&ved=0CDsQ9QEwAg&dur=58

joegriffinjnr

This is a close to an Aer Lingus A380 as your gonna get!

seanmacc

bbk wrote: »

It was a pity Aer Lingus pulled out of Dubai the way they did (recession).

The big cash cow in the DXB route which AerLingus probably went into the route for but were never able to maximise was the Air Freight. There's probably even still a lack of capacity in it. Huge amounts of Pharmacuticals, Cola Concentrate and Computer processors leave Dublin by sea, bound for Heathrow and onto Dubai every day.

AerLingus are still a very very small fish in this business. Empty seats on planes into DXB don't necessarily mean the flight is not profitable.

Jamie2k9

seanmacc wrote: »

The big cash cow in the DXB route which AerLingus probably went into the route for but were never able to maximise was the Air Freight. There's probably even still a lack of capacity in it. Huge amounts of Pharmacuticals, Cola Concentrate and Computer processors leave Dublin by sea, bound for Heathrow and onto Dubai every day.

AerLingus are still a very very small fish in this business. Empty seats on planes into DXB don't necessarily mean the flight is not profitable.

Or just mabye ask yourself how many passengers who are flying with EK and EY are O&D passenegers, I would say 80+ are onwords which is why it wasn't suitable for EI.

smurfjed

However to be honest I feel a better option would be for EI to carry more pax to North America, allow EY to get them to Dublin and go onwards with EI.

Whats in it for EY?

One only has to look at the group of chauffeurs waiting in Dublin for each EK flight, to see that EI would never be able to compete with them on the route, as for using EI to DXB and then EK onwards, there is no advantage in this as the EK fare structure is extremely competitive.

As for the A380, it doesn't make sense, increasing the number of A330's and having the option to increase or decrease the frequency to suit the season is a lot more efficient. Historically, airlines got bitten badly with the B747 when the bottom fell out of atlantic traffic loads.

I'm still curious as to why they want the use leased 757's rather than increasing the A330 fleet. Or even investigating using the A320 with additional fuel tanks.

smurfjed

Shamrock231

smurfjed wrote: »

Whats in it for EY?

I think that due to the fact that EY are stretched pretty thin at the moment and can't get new aircraft soon enough, if EI took up one of the daily rotations to AUH it'd give EY the ability to use that aircraft on other routes that it can operate of of AUH to other destinations, but still get the feed.

Not saying it'd happen, but it's certainly not a loss for EY if it were to happen.

smurfjed

But the EY level of service both on the ground and in the air is vastly superior to EI, so I wouldn't be impressed buying an EY ticket and ending up on EI, not to mention the new EI baggage rules.

smurfjed

L1011

The "new" EI baggage rules are exactly the same as their old ones, though. They just managed to word them even more poorly.

donvito99

What could happen, as Shamrock said, is EI beefing up EYs schedule, from 10 to 14 weekly (if it isn't already in the summer).

EI are in no position now to compete with EY (for obvious reasons) or EK to Dubai. They had their chance.

Peregrine

donvito99 wrote: »

What could happen, as Shamrock said, is EI beefing up EYs schedule, from 10 to 14 weekly (if it isn't already in the summer).

EI are in no position now to compete with EY (for obvious reasons) or EK to Dubai. They had their chance.

EY are increasing capacity from the 1st of July are they not? 777s 6 times a week and A330s for the remaining 4.

Jamie2k9

I'm still curious as to why they want the use leased 757's rather than increasing the A330 fleet. Or even investigating using the A320 with additional fuel tanks.

smurfjed

B757 are to keep their SNN service going year roun and profitable, if they decided to drop them there would be major political fallout over it....

smurfjed

Thanks Jamie2k9, so why dont they use the A320?

smurfjed

Shamrock231

smurfjed wrote: »

Thanks Jamie2k9, so why dont they use the A320?

smurfjed

It hasn't got the range for the missions, and the 757 holds more passengers. They're supposedly looking into using the A321NEO though which would have the range and a similar level of seats.

Jamie2k9

smurfjed wrote: »

Thanks Jamie2k9, so why dont they use the A320?

smurfjed

Doesn't have the range.

It will be the A321NEO that will likely replace the B757's from SNN but that will depend on when EI order them and take delivery.

smurfjed

POA KJFK TIME 06:30 DIST NGMS 2713 DIST NAMS 2860

6:30 hrs is within range of the A320 with one additional centre tank. To me, the logistics of operating a common aircraft makes more sense than setting up this 757 sub-charter, if you are worried about the winter winds, then substitute the A320 with an A319.

smurfjed

Shamrock231

smurfjed wrote: »

6:30 hrs is within range of the A320 with one additional centre tank. To me, the logistics of operating a common aircraft makes more sense than setting up this 757 sub-charter, if you are worried about the winter winds, then substitute the A320 with an A319.

smurfjed

Yes, but with an A320 or A319 you're going to carry much less passengers across, even less when you put a business class in. Also fixed costs of operating a transatlantic flight are pretty high, so spreading that cost among a smaller passenger base would make for much greater ticket prices and would probably fail.

smurfjed

Also fixed costs of operating a transatlantic flight are pretty high

What are the unique costs associated with the Atlantic?

The next question is what exactly is the expected load? A dual class A320 could be fitted with 120 seats, but in the winter it would be limited to about 90 usable seats due the extra fuel requirements. OK its a big jump from this to a 274 seater A332, but imho, leasing a B757 diminishes the EI product.

smurfjed

Shamrock231

smurfjed wrote: »

What are the unique costs associated with the Atlantic?

The next question is what exactly is the expected load? A dual class A320 could be fitted with 120 seats, but in the winter it would be limited to about 90 usable seats due the extra fuel requirements. OK its a big jump from this to a 274 seater A332, but imho, leasing a B757 diminishes the EI product.

smurfjed

Well the fact you have to put crews up in a hotel for a night would be one of the bigger costs.

L1011

smurfjed wrote: »

A dual class A320 could be fitted with 120 seats, but in the winter it would be limited to about 90 usable seats due the extra fuel requirements. OK its a big jump from this to a 274 seater A332, but imho, leasing a B757 diminishes the EI product.

smurfjed

I would consider a 90 capacity A320 to do far more damage than a B757, bearing in mind that both would only be for short to medium terms and would hence likely have the same quality of interior fitout. A B757 seems "big enough" for TATL, a 320 does not, particularly if a significant portion of the economy seats are roped off.

Also, fitting a centre tank means less cargo, and EI makes major money on TATL cargo. Could easily tip the financials over to lossmaking on that alone.

smurfjed

The hotel charges apply to any route that is 6.5 hours, regardless of the atlantic or not. The big question is what is the actual demand on the route, how many tourists are there in the winter? Is it high yield business travel? As for the cargo load, is it constant and could it be trucked to Dublin if required.

The seats wont be "roped off", its a payload issue not a trim issue, so people actually get to spread out.

Seatguru shows the Finnair 757's with about 200 seats, it will be interesting to see how they reconfigure them.

smurfjed

Jamie2k9

smurfjed wrote: »

The hotel charges apply to any route that is 6.5 hours, regardless of the atlantic or not. The big question is what is the actual demand on the route, how many tourists are there in the winter? Is it high yield business travel? As for the cargo load, is it constant and could it be trucked to Dublin if required.

The seats wont be "roped off", its a payload issue not a trim issue, so people actually get to spread out.

Seatguru shows the Finnair 757's with about 200 seats, it will be interesting to see how they reconfigure them.

smurfjed

Would expect 165-170 like most US carriers who operate B757 to Europe.

robertxxx

Wouldn't the A380 not be the selling point itself?

If I was booking a flight to New York I'd want to be on that plane, I'd feel really ripped off if I was put onto something else, in facted I'd just book dates to suit so I could fly in the a380.

Think about it, the "ONLY" a380 in Ireland, demand for it would be huge!

I have friends who are not into aviation but yet booked to fly with virgin airways to New York, starting from Dublin just because they liked the look and advertisement of the planes.

Peregrine

robertxxx wrote: »

Wouldn't the A380 not be the selling point itself?

If I was booking a flight to New York I'd want to be on that plane, I'd feel really ripped off if I was put onto something else, in facted I'd just book dates to suit so I could fly in the a380.

Think about it, the "ONLY" a380 in Ireland, demand for it would be huge!

I have friends who are not into aviation but yet booked to fly with virgin airways to New York, starting from Dublin just because they liked the look and advertisement of the planes.

Yes but the demand is simply not big enough. Right now they fill some 80% of their seats on T/A routes, that's 80% of around 300 seats. If you put an A380 on the route that's doubling the number of seats.

Why would 300 extra people who has no reason to go to New York suddenly decide to go just because EI are operating A380s on the route? And even if some people did would they do it every day? An aircraft, even one like the A380 won't simply create a demand that's not there.

lord lucan

Imagine a full A380 on the 105 to JFK clearing CBP in DUB!

**Shudder**

Jamie2k9

It may be just me but I think the A380 is a horrible monstrosity of an aircraft that has ever being produced. I never want to travel on one.

lord lucan

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It may be just me but I think the A380 is a horrible monstrosity of an aircraft that has ever being produced. I never want to travel on one.

I'm not a fan myself,more of a Boeing than Airbus fan,but i'd still like to travel on one all the same just to experience it. I'll be watching to see if BA run a few shorthaul flights with their A380's for crew training later in the summer.

Jamie2k9

lord lucan wrote: »

I'm not a fan myself,more of a Boeing than Airbus fan,but i'd still like to travel on one all the same just to experience it. I'll be watching to see if BA run a few shorthaul flights with their A380's for crew training later in the summer.

Ok I probaly would travel on it but its the look from outside that I hate. Prefer Airbus to Boeing but am a fan of the B787 and 757.

Is DUB able to handle an A380 stand wise?

lord lucan

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Is DUB able to handle an A380 stand wise?

I think stand 404 could but it would take an awful long time to embark/disembark.

dutopia

I think the A380 is one of the most beautiful and breathtaking pieces of engineering ever made. Can't wait to travel on one... almost did actually and they switched the plane at the last minute to a 777, it was at the time of the rib cracks. Not a happy camper

Peregrine

dutopia wrote: »

I think the A380 is one of the most beautiful and breathtaking pieces of engineering ever made. Can't wait to travel on one... almost did actually and they switched the plane at the last minute to a 777, it was at the time of the rib cracks. Not a happy camper

It's a great aircraft and everything but it just looks so out of proportion. I didn't notice it in the beginning but after a while it really bothers you..

The planned A380-900 however is 7 metres longer and should look more in proportion to it's height.

cson

The A380 was a bet the company play by Airbus and tbh it remains to be seen if it'll come off. Order book is pretty slack for the last couple of years; ~400 is break even and they've only 250ish in the book between orders and those delivered already.

Boeing dropped the ball on it with the 787 problems imo; had they got the greener/cleaner/efficient balance with it right they could really have turned the screw on Airbus.

faceman

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It may be just me but I think the A380 is a horrible monstrosity of an aircraft that has ever being produced. I never want to travel on one.

The A380 is a pleasure to be a passenger on. Very quiet cabin and spacious. Its always my first choice plane when available.

Jamie2k9

faceman wrote: »

The A380 is a pleasure to be a passenger on. Very quiet cabin and spacious. Its always my first choice plane when available.

Don't get more wrong its a great aircraft but I hate the look of the A380-800

The planned A380-900 however is 7 metres longer and should look more in proportion to it's height.

Just did a google search for it and it looks much better.

dubdaymo

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It may be just me but I think the A380 is a horrible monstrosity of an aircraft that has ever being produced. I never want to travel on one.

No, Jamie, it is not just you. It's an ugly beast. I've seen prettier concrete blocks. That depiction of an EI A380 made me positively sick to look at and I'm glad nobody will ever see one like it in the real world.

b757

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Don't get more wrong its a great aircraft but I hate the look of the A380-800

Just did a google search for it and it looks much better.

Same here, seen it in MAN and I couldn't see what the big deal was. Give me a 74 any day! The -900 does look a bit better though, not much now to be honest.

Mister Jingles

While the A380 is some piece of engineering I still think the 747 is the most spectacular aircraft ever made taking into account that it was designed back in the 60's.

artanevilla

We had a guy in from Airbus giving us a lecture on the A380. Seems like a serious piece of kit engineering wise. The guy was from marketing though so you have to take what he said about comfort etc with a pinch of salt. Still like to go up in one though!

brandon_flowers

The difference with the A380 is that it is as comfortable inside as it is ugly outside.

It is very comfortable, no doubt about that. I would say the most comfortable pax aircraft available maybe baring the Dreamliner as I haven't been on it yet. There is a notable difference in sound levels inside the cabin, almost surreal silence sometimes. It is a huge difference to the noise level on a 777. Also the boarding (which can be the most painful part of travelling) is a pleasure on the A380 with the 3 door operations.

When sitting on a plane for 12 hours I'd much prefer a bit of comfort on the inside than a bit of beauty on the outside.

merisi

A friend of mine flew London-Kuala Lumpur on an A380 (and back) a few weeks ago and described it as the most comfortable long haul flight he's ever had by a considerable distance.

islanderre

Totally agree; had had the pleasure of flying the Air France and Lufthansa A380. A great aircraft to fly on as passenger, so smooth; quiet and comfortable.
Flew on the 777 a few times too and once soon after the A380 but in the future will strongly consider paying a few euros more to fly the A380..... B777 is so loud in comparison.

So for me its either the A340 or A380......