Emirates future Fleet

Gael23

With the demise of the A380, what will Emirates fleet look like in the future? This causes a huge drop in capacity for them

Van.Bosch

Gael23 wrote: »

With the demise of the A380, what will Emirates fleet look like in the future? This causes a huge drop in capacity for them

Not if they replace them a larger number of smaller planes. DWC will give them the space but the issue could be at places like LHR.

Cookiemunster

Well they've another 14 A380s to come so they'll be flying them for a long time yet. They've also ordered 40 A330neos and 30 A350s.

Gael23

Van.Bosch wrote: »

Not if they replace them a larger number of smaller planes. DWC will give them the space but the issue could be at places like LHR.

DWC and DXB are a good distance apart so that would create logistical challenges that are hard to overcome. Then you have restrictions on slots, particularly at LHR.

Nijmegen

Gael23 wrote: »

With the demise of the A380, what will Emirates fleet look like in the future? This causes a huge drop in capacity for them

About 15% I read, if you just phase out the 380s in favour of a 777-787--350-330 fleet on a like for like basis. But the name of the game is to fly planes profitably, not to fly the biggest planes full. I’d say their route optimisation strategy will be pretty on point given the data they must have operating at their scale, and I know folks are obsessing about slot restricted airports, but really how many of those are there vs the total pie? I think it’s a good move. They probably lose on a few select routes but otherwise the per seat economics are phenomenal at their scale.

Gael23

Nijmegen wrote: »

About 15% I read, if you just phase out the 380s in favour of a 777-787--350-330 fleet on a like for like basis. But the name of the game is to fly planes profitably, not to fly the biggest planes full. I’d say their route optimisation strategy will be pretty on point given the data they must have operating at their scale, and I know folks are obsessing about slot restricted airports, but really how many of those are there vs the total pie? I think it’s a good move. They probably lose on a few select routes but otherwise the per seat economics are phenomenal at their scale.

Will 15% fewer seats mean fare increases? That’s the issue.

Tenger

Gael23 wrote: »

Will 15% fewer seats mean fare increases? That’s the issue.

Its 15% drop in capacity based on repkaving A380s with B777s/A350s. But having more aircraft counters this.

Nijmegen

Gael23 wrote: »

Will 15% fewer seats mean fare increases? That’s the issue.

As I said, on a like for like basis they'd lose 15% but are likely to have more capacity overall and within this more flexibility. And the per pax km flown number is a real decider here - this article is looking at transpacific flights but is a pretty good exemplar of the economics on a per passenger km flown basis. The pic also tells a story. Just look where the 777 and 350 sits vs 380.

Gael23

Nijmegen wrote: »

As I said, on a like for like basis they'd lose 15% but are likely to have more capacity overall and within this more flexibility. And the per pax km flown number is a real decider here - this article is looking at transpacific flights but is a pretty good exemplar of the economics on a per passenger km flown basis. The pic also tells a story. Just look where the 777 and 350 sits vs 380.

Would the increased number of aircraft in the sky not significantly increase operating costs, as in having two planes on a route that was previously serviced by one A380? There’s also the environmental impact

Nijmegen

Gael23 wrote: »

Would the increased number of aircraft in the sky not significantly increase operating costs, as in having two planes on a route that was previously serviced by one A380? There’s also the environmental impact

That's why we're looking at the fuel burn per passenger km flown. It doesn't matter if one plane carries 200 people and another 300, the fuel burn is looked at per pax per km. This is also an average and can vary by route as well as aircraft - A heavier aircraft gets back a lot of gas mileage if its sitting at cruising altitude for 12 hours sipping the fuel (relatively) vs a plane that flies for an hour over to London, and then flies back, and does it twelve times a day - as a % of flying hours, it spends a lot more in the intensive takeoff and climb phase vs cruise.

Looking at that graph above, what it tells you is that for 1 passenger over 1km on a transpacific route, the 787 is up to 60% more fuel efficient in bringing that bum over that km. That's what I mean by the economics stacking up quite quickly for Emirates and offsetting the capacity bump they get from an A380. Fly 3,600 times per week mostly long haul as they do, with half of those flights being A380s, every % reduction in fuel burn per pax per km adds up super mega quickly on the bottom line and more than makes up for financing a few extra planes and paying a few extra pilots and cabin crew.

basill

To really understand what effect it will have on their profitability you would have to know the load factors on the 380s and then the yields.

Gael23

Have Emirates shown any interest in the 747-8?

L1011

Nobody is ever going to buy another 747-8i.

Freighter and maybe BBJ, but the normal passenger model is dead

Nijmegen

Gael23 wrote: »

Have Emirates shown any interest in the 747-8?

Look at where it sits on that graph. Anything below the line is dead. Only reason the 747 exists is for freight now, they have a backlog that will see another 4 years of production at the rate of 1 every 2 months. They're knocking out 10 777's for the same timeframe (and that will expand rapidly when the 777x comes rolling off the line next year) and 24 787's (with a plan to go to 28) for comparison. The only thing keeping the 747 order book open really is freight, UPS ordered 14 this quarter; which doubled the order book. Otherwise the 747 was going to finish production before even the A380.

Mass market quads are dead, finished, no more.

LeakRate

The a350-9 actually shows pretty poor on that graph vs 787 and even 330

theguzman

The congested airports argument is also nearly dead. Heathrow is supposed to get a third runaway. Dubai World Central will relieve Dubai and places like Beijing have got a new airport. The A380 will still be around for a long time yet and will fill its own niche market, like maximising seats on slot restricted and bi-lateral restricted airports. Smaller, fuel efficient airliners from smaller regional airports point to point will be the future.

Idbatterim

How would the 737 going toeast coast is or a321 lr sit on those graphs?

Draco

I was talking to someone from Emirates a few months ago and they were saying that the issue around the A380 wasn't the number of pax it could carry but instead that a pair of 777s could carry about the same pax but also carry more cargo. The difference in cargo was making the 777s more profitable for them on top of the added flexibility around routing.

Tenger

LeakRate wrote: »

The a350-9 actually shows pretty poor on that graph vs 787 and even 330

I found that surprising. Hence the current A350-1000 program. Perhaps the A333 is higher as it has been successively improved as an aircraft. The increased MTOW has made it a more efficient aircraft?

Draco wrote: »

I was talking to someone from Emirates a few months ago and they were saying that the issue around the A380 wasn't the number of pax it could carry but instead that a pair of 777s could carry about the same pax but also carry more cargo. The difference in cargo was making the 777s more profitable for them on top of the added flexibility around routing.

This logic was the reason EI ordered the A330 back in the early 90s. They had 3 B747s, they ordered 4 A33os which had almost half the fuel cost with pretty much equal cargo capacity.
From a booking engine point of view 2 departures makes the carrier more attractive than a single departure per day. You expand you catchement for passengers.