undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmpweiher8y ago0 comments

> It has been obscenely profitable over its lifetime

Exactly. And these obscene profits in a line where it had no competition were a problem for Airbus. A problem that has now disappeared.

> The A380 first flew in 2005 [2]. It has been a commercial disaster.

(a) It helped kill the "obscenely profitable" 747.

(b) It was a hedge in case airlines were going to stick with the hub-and-spoke model

0 comments

18 comments · 4 top-level

1_2__48y ago· 6 in thread

Um, the 787 is what kiled the 747. As in Boeing decided, as all companies do, to retire a line in favor of a more modern one. It’s really weird you don’t acknowledge that at all.

monocasa8y ago

The 787 is a little more than half the capacity of a 747.

cdibona8y ago

It's a better bet to say the 777 killed the passenger 747. The real question is if cargo operations will continue to drive 747 demand.

It'll probably look like tanker/military demand for the 767.

The a380 cargo option never really developed...

2 more replies

briandear8y ago

However the efficiency allows long, thin routes. Essentially the 787 and now the newer 777 allow more agile routing over longer distances which opens up airlines to greater routing efficiencies that aren’t as dependent on super-hub airports. There are over 600 787 routes, of which 368 are long haul and 90 are completely new routes. For example, ANA flies Tokyo to San Jose and BA flies London San Jose, those I think the BA version runs the new 777s now.

My point is that passenger capacity isn’t such an important metric when comparing the ‘47 and the ‘87. And the A380 is an airplane built for last century’s model of air travel.

1 more reply

JumpCrisscross8y ago

The general point being nobody wants a passenger plane with the A380 or 747's capacity anymore. Small, efficient, long-distance planes like the 787, A350 and C-Series are rendering the larger format obsolete.

1 more reply

SteveCoast8y ago

At a lower $/passenger/mile.

Why fly one 747 from NY to London and make people connect to it, when you can fly one 787 from Denver and one 787 from Chicago?

2 more replies

junkscience20178y ago

by design

valuearb8y ago· 4 in thread

The 747 was a problem that was disappearing on it's own. When the A380 was approved, the 747 was no longer obscenely profitable, it was already facing lower demand and the requirements for an expensive update.

Airbus crippled itself trying to eliminate it with the A380, they blew a huge amount of capital they'll never get back.

The hub and spoke model is dead and won't be coming back. New slots can be easily created by adding runways or building new airports. Flying point to point isn't just more convenient and faster, it is cheaper and more fuel efficient.

AnimalMuppet8y ago

> New slots can be easily created by adding runways or building new airports.

I wouldn't call that "easy". How many new runways are going to be built next year? How many new airports? I'll make a guess that the answers are "none" and "very few or none".

zhte4158y ago

I think this depends where in the world you are. In a lot of places it is very easy.

merb8y ago

> How many new airports?

maybe berlin, if they decide to rebuilt the failed project.

valuearb8y ago

Well, demand is the driver of that. Right now the need isn't that great. If it becomes that great, a far easier solution than the A380 is new runways and new airports.

1 more reply

junkscience20178y ago· 4 in thread

fuel costs killed the 747, not the A380

we know this is true because no one is replacing retired 747s with A380s, they are replacing them with smaller, more fuel efficient planes

markonen8y ago

Plenty of airlines have replaced 747s with A380s. British Airways, Lufthansa, Air France and Qantas immediately come to mind.

yardie8y ago

It hasn't been a 1-for-1 replacement. At least for BA the 747 has been replaced by the A380, 777, and 787 on many routes. All 3 have different capacities to scale with demand; 787 < 777 < A380. And all 3 are more fuel efficient per passenger than the 747.

nimish8y ago

The first three are from countries where Eads doing well is a political thing: Britain Germany and France own chunks of airbus and have a lot invested in it doing well. The former flag carriers are only nominally independent from the state.

3 more replies

i3868y ago

Qantas are currently replacing 747s with a fleet of A380s and 777s

1 more reply

TylerE8y ago

I don't think the A380 really competes that directly. The 747 can use many more airports than the A380.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

18 comments · 4 top-level

1_2__48y ago· 6 in thread

Um, the 787 is what kiled the 747. As in Boeing decided, as all companies do, to retire a line in favor of a more modern one. It’s really weird you don’t acknowledge that at all.

monocasa8y ago

The 787 is a little more than half the capacity of a 747.

cdibona8y ago

It's a better bet to say the 777 killed the passenger 747. The real question is if cargo operations will continue to drive 747 demand.

It'll probably look like tanker/military demand for the 767.

The a380 cargo option never really developed...

2 more replies

briandear8y ago

My point is that passenger capacity isn’t such an important metric when comparing the ‘47 and the ‘87. And the A380 is an airplane built for last century’s model of air travel.

1 more reply

JumpCrisscross8y ago

1 more reply

SteveCoast8y ago

At a lower $/passenger/mile.

Why fly one 747 from NY to London and make people connect to it, when you can fly one 787 from Denver and one 787 from Chicago?

2 more replies

junkscience20178y ago

by design

valuearb8y ago· 4 in thread

Airbus crippled itself trying to eliminate it with the A380, they blew a huge amount of capital they'll never get back.

AnimalMuppet8y ago

> New slots can be easily created by adding runways or building new airports.

I wouldn't call that "easy". How many new runways are going to be built next year? How many new airports? I'll make a guess that the answers are "none" and "very few or none".

zhte4158y ago

I think this depends where in the world you are. In a lot of places it is very easy.

merb8y ago

> How many new airports?

maybe berlin, if they decide to rebuilt the failed project.

valuearb8y ago

Well, demand is the driver of that. Right now the need isn't that great. If it becomes that great, a far easier solution than the A380 is new runways and new airports.

1 more reply

junkscience20178y ago· 4 in thread

fuel costs killed the 747, not the A380

we know this is true because no one is replacing retired 747s with A380s, they are replacing them with smaller, more fuel efficient planes

markonen8y ago

Plenty of airlines have replaced 747s with A380s. British Airways, Lufthansa, Air France and Qantas immediately come to mind.

yardie8y ago

nimish8y ago

3 more replies

i3868y ago

Qantas are currently replacing 747s with a fleet of A380s and 777s

1 more reply

TylerE8y ago

I don't think the A380 really competes that directly. The 747 can use many more airports than the A380.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse