Airbus news

Crumbs868

A lot of negative stuff released yesterday and share price got a hammering
-first A350 handover delayed (already covered on this forum)
-A380 future in doubt due to current engines becoming redundant v the new generations and looks like big money to develop new ones
-A330 production being cut before NEO comes online, not that surprising I would have thought

http://m.bbc.com/news/business-30427116

pepe the prawn

Just a thought, but I understand Airbus have some a380's that haven't been taken by those who ordered them, why doesn't Michael o Leary jump on the bandwagon and buy them? I think he has said in the past that all that's keeping them from doing transatlantic flights is aircraft availability?

kona

pepe the prawn wrote: »

Just a thought, but I understand Airbus have some a380's that haven't been taken by those who ordered them, why doesn't Michael o Leary jump on the bandwagon and buy them? I think he has said in the past that all that's keeping them from doing transatlantic flights is aircraft availability?

Airbus wouldn't sell him the steam off their piss

Peregrine

pepe the prawn wrote: »

Just a thought, but I understand Airbus have some a380's that haven't been taken by those who ordered them, why doesn't Michael o Leary jump on the bandwagon and buy them? I think he has said in the past that all that's keeping them from doing transatlantic flights is aircraft availability?

I'm not great with sarcasm sometimes so pardon me but...you are joking, right?

pepe the prawn

Nim wrote: »

I'm not great with sarcasm sometimes so pardon me but...you are joking, right?

Where's the joke? I'm not well versed on the subject, so please enlighten me..

Ps.. Sorry if I spoiled your morning. ffs.

donvito99

If MO'L is to take any a/c off Airbus for transatlantic service, it's gotta be the A330neo. Order books is sparse at the moment and for that reason imagine John Leahy would cut Mick a deal.

Tenger

Those A380 are overweight and have older engines which burn more fuel, in addition 4 engines aircraft are not fuel efficient. The A380 is only a money maker if loadfactor is >80%.

MoL has stated that any longhaul operation is dependent on availability of at least 15-20 cheap modern fuel efficient widebodies. They are waiting on another 2002 situation where airlines cancelled huge numbers of orders and FR were able to make Boeing an offer they couldn't refuse.

Airbus To Make A380neo Decision In 2015

http://aviationweek.com/farnborough-2014/airbus-make-a380neo-decision-2015

Airbus plans to make the decision about whether or not it will launch a re-engined version of the Airbus A380 in 2015, Airbus Chief Commercial Officer Customers John Leahy told Aviation Week at the Farnborough Air Show. Emirates, the aircraft’s most important operator, keeps on pushing Airbus hard to launch the A380neo and Leahy says that “if he [Emirates President Tim Clark] wants it, we need to study it.”

Emirates has been aiming at getting the aircraft as soon as possible and was hoping to have an A380neo available by around 2018. But according to Leahy, if Airbus was to do it, the aircraft would not arrive that soon. “You would be looking at 2020 or so,” Leahy said. Emirates has just taken delivery of its 50th A380, the airline has 90 more on firm order. Airbus has a total of 324 orders for the aircraft and has so far delivered 135 of them.

Leahy says the internal studies will continue throughout the second half of 2014 and will focus on answering the question whether the additional sales possible with new engines will justify the investment and how many of the future orders Airbus could get without the re-engining exercise.

In another A380 debate, Leahy says that Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker is complaining about “cosmetic issues” such as slightly imperfect colors and gaps between cabin walls and passenger information stickers. “There is no reason why a different airline would not have taken the aircraft,” he says. He believes that Airbus could have insisted on Qatar taking the aircraft, while the small remaining issues could be addressed during the next maintenance downtime. But with the airline being as important a customer as it is, the manufacturer is still aiming at an amicable solution. Qatar has ten A380s, 80 A350s and dozens of narrowbodies on order.

Qatar is also the first customer of the A350-900 later this year.

christy c

kona wrote: »

Airbus wouldn't sell him the steam off their piss

Do people believe this crap? Airbus would turn down millions of dollars because they don't like MO'L? Yeah right

Tenger

christy c wrote: »

Do people believe this crap? Airbus would turn down millions of dollars because they don't like MO'L? Yeah right

Airbus would not turn down millions of dollars from Ryanair, however they will turn down millions of dollars if the list price is 10's of millions of dollars.

Airbus didn't like being used as a pawn in the last Ryanair negotiations with Boeing (the threat of a switch to A320 made Boeing offer more discount) so they have stated that they will be happy to sell to FR but at normal prices, no massive discounts.

christy c

Tenger wrote: »

Airbus would not turn down millions of dollars from Ryanair, however they will turn down millions of dollars if the list price is 10's of millions of dollars.

Airbus didn't like being used as a pawn in the last Ryanair negotiations with Boeing (the threat of a switch to A320 made Boeing offer more discount) so they have stated that they will be happy to sell to FR but at normal prices, no massive discounts.

I'm not sure what you mean by turning down the list price. The list price is pie in the sky, no airline/lessor ever pays that.

Yes Airbus have told the press that FR can buy as many as they want at list price, which is laughable. If Ryanair were to offer a price which is in line with what others pay, Airbus would take it- its a business after all. Of course Airbus would have to be sure that FR are genuine about the offer in the first place, but they're smart guys and I'm sure they could figure it out.

circular flexing

The era of big planes is over I think.

I doubt we are too far away from a similar announcement from Boeing about the 747-8I, given current order numbers.

kub

circular flexing wrote: »

The era of big planes is over I think.

I doubt we are too far away from a similar announcement from Boeing about the 747-8I, given current order numbers.

You reckon smaller planes going to smaller airports as opposed to hubs and massive planes?

Tenger

christy c wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean by turning down the list price. The list price is pie in the sky, no airline/lessor ever pays that......

I wasn't too clear. Airbus have stated that they would sell to FR but not at the discounts that FR have previously gotten from Boeing, and that FR keep saying that they will look for. Every airline gets a price that differs from the list prices, all depends on the package they get with Airbus.

kub wrote: »

You reckon smaller planes going to smaller airports as opposed to hubs and massive planes?

Well its all relative. Airbus and Boeing had different views on future air travel. Airbus went for the A380 and the mega-hub concept, whereas Boeing went for the B787 and the point to point model.
Both airlines trumpeted their vision in order to show how great their new plane was. Its a PR spin thing. (At the same time Boeing were developing the B748i and Airbus, the A350XWB)

Overall the efficiency and increasing range of the larger twins (B777,A330) alongside the newer B787/A350 will decrease the dominance of mega-hubs and the jumbo's that operate from them. The mega-hub and B747/A380 will not disappear but will become less dominant than in the past.

circular flexing

kub wrote: »

You reckon smaller planes going to smaller airports as opposed to hubs and massive planes?

Yes. Just look at the order numbers for 787/777/A350 compared to A380/747-8I.

youreadthat

Tenger wrote: »

I wasn't too clear. Airbus have stated that they would sell to FR but not at the discounts that FR have previously gotten from Boeing, and that FR keep saying that they will look for. Every airline gets a price that differs from the list prices, all depends on the package they get with Airbus.



Well its all relative. Airbus and Boeing had different views on future air travel. Airbus went for the A380 and the mega-hub concept, whereas Boeing went for the B787 and the point to point model.
Both airlines trumpeted their vision in order to show how great their new plane was. Its a PR spin thing. (At the same time Boeing were developing the B748i and Airbus, the A350XWB)

Overall the efficiency and increasing range of the larger twins (B777,A330) alongside the newer B787/A350 will decrease the dominance of mega-hubs and the jumbo's that operate from them. The mega-hub and B747/A380 will not disappear but will become less dominant than in the past.

Not to mention that efficient aircraft became even more important after the financial crisis which coincided with the start of a380 ops, both stagnating passenger numbers and pushing up the price of fuel.

18MonthsaSlave

and yet Airbus won't allow ATR sink money in to developing a new 90 to 100 seater turboprop despite a very real market for it in Europe South America and Asia

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-23/airbus-reviews-future-of-atr-turboprop-venture-with-finmeccanica.html

I have a list two pages long of airlines asking us to build this plane

Tenger

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

and yet Airbus won't allow ATR sink money in to developing a new 90 to 100 seater turboprop despite a very real market for it in Europe South America and Asia

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-23/airbus-reviews-future-of-atr-turboprop-venture-with-finmeccanica.html

How big is a page and how big is the font?


Developing a new turbo-prop in the 90-100 when it is a crowded market already may not be the safe bet you seem to think it is.
ATR already have a very successful aircraft in the ATR72-500/-600
Embraer, Comac, C-Series, MRJ, Superjet are all fighting for that segment.

18MonthsaSlave

Name the competitors with turboprop planes flying in this market or even commited to flying in this market in next couple of years.
The market is for a turboprop not a regional jet. Regional Jets eat fuel. Turboprops do not.

If you have a problem with Bloomberg's font then take it up with them, not me.

The long tube that is the ATR-72 can't be extended any further.
the Q400 has already been extended as far as it can go with a seating pitch only suitable for small Asians.

man98

Bombardier are already developing a stretched Q400. It's either the Q500 or there's some letters stuck at the end of it. I remember reading about it. ATR need this plane and the Q400NextGen is certified for 12 more passengers than the 72-600.

donvito99

I imagine some of the US regional carriers would jump all over a 100 seat turboprop (would require some serious power, engines from A400M would be sweet:D), the bombardiers RJs won't last forever.

NZ_2014

Twould be a shame if the big planes were no longer built, they are mighty impressive machines.

What about this pie in the sky plan for a even bigger plane:



from...

Is this whale-shaped plane the future of airliners?

man98

I don't like it. Anything other than traditional design looks ugly to me. As aviation nears Sci Fi designs, it gets more boring. I see planes getting bigger (a stretched A380 perhaps) but not more than 1,000 pax certification. While this seems short sighted, I've come up with a nice way to fit more passengers into a plane. It's called not going overboard on Business Class. A Ryanair 738 fits more than an ANA 787. Why? It defies logic. To go forward, airlines need to look at less legroom for First + Business. Suites in First Class are the reason Climate Change is happening. While the A380 is certified for 853 passengers, Lufthansa (the most packed example I can think of) have a 14 | 98 | 420 configuration on theirs. If 60% occupancy is the highest load they can take (because there's not too much room for cargo either) how is the A380 more efficient... alternatively look at Norwegian 787s, Corsair 744s (extreme example) or Orbest A330s. While they seem picked, it is the way forward.

NZ_2014

man98 wrote: »

I don't like it. Anything other than traditional design looks ugly to me. As aviation nears Sci Fi designs, it gets more boring. I see planes getting bigger (a stretched A380 perhaps) but not more than 1,000 pax certification. While this seems short sighted, I've come up with a nice way to fit more passengers into a plane. It's called not going overboard on Business Class. A Ryanair 738 fits more than an ANA 787. Why? It defies logic. To go forward, airlines need to look at less legroom for First + Business. Suites in First Class are the reason Climate Change is happening. While the A380 is certified for 853 passengers, Lufthansa (the most packed example I can think of) have a 14 | 98 | 420 configuration on theirs. If 60% occupancy is the highest load they can take (because there's not too much room for cargo either) how is the A380 more efficient... alternatively look at Norwegian 787s, Corsair 744s (extreme example) or Orbest A330s. While they seem picked, it is the way forward.

Business class is awesome though. .

donvito99

First and Business is also - traditionally - where profit is made long haul.

Gael23

What will EI do going into the future?

Tenger

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

......
The market is for a turboprop not a regional jet. Regional Jets eat fuel. Turboprops do not.

If you have a problem with Bloomberg's font then take it up with them, not me.

Well my font comment was supposed to be tongue in cheek!!

As for the jet vs turboprop market......newer RJ's's are being marketing to compete with turboprops, to be as efficient, not "eat fuel"....if the purchase price and service is right then an airline may well go with the RJ.

man98 wrote: »

........ I've come up with a nice way to fit more passengers into a plane. It's called not going overboard on Business Class. A Ryanair 738 fits more than an ANA 787. Why? It defies logic. To go forward, airlines need to look at less legroom for First + Business......... alternatively look at Norwegian 787s, Corsair 744s (extreme example) or Orbest A330s. While they seem picked, it is the way forward.

F and J Class pay the big bucks that cover the cost of the flight....everything after that is gravy.

And blaming premium airlines for climate change is a big much. Airlines have only had a significant impact over the last 30-40 years, climate change has been happening since the Industrial revolution. Currently aviation accounts for approx 5% of global carbon emissions, and this figure is dropping all the time as the airlines are self-regulating by turning to ever more fuel efficient aircraft.

ryanf1 wrote: »

What will EI do going into the future?

You might want to narrow doen that question a little!!
In terms of EI/Airbus future.....well they have A350 due from 2018, but they may end up switching to the A330neo with deliveries from 2019. Shorthaul Most would expect an order for the A320neo over the next 12-18 months.

man98

I'm not blaming premium airlines for climate change, that's Daily Mail tier scaremongering. I'm saying 84" seat pitch from airlines which preach stewardship is excessive. I understand airlines make their money off business + first, but it's to the detriment of the environment, as well as a waste of oil IMO. While me and Norwegian Long Haul do have our disagreements, their 787s are what airlines need to work towards.

IRLConor

I reckon you could get an emissions reduction from eliminating the big seats up front:

Fewer highly profitable seats -> fewer profitable routes -> fewer routes flown -> lower overall emissions.

squonk

That 'Whale' plane strikes me as some guy's flight of fancy. Much like the numerous 'next iphone' designs that people knock up, there is no real basis in reality with it and while Boeing, Airbus and others are no doubt working on future design evolutions, chances are they look nothing like that and are more conventional.