Is the A380 going to a success?

Question

At the moment airbus is going through some turbulent moments, with its A380 program. But is this aircraft going to be a success, are the airlines going to be able to sell so many seats on just one flight. What are you views about this super jumbo.

Answer 1

Maybe in the long term it will be good. But for the next 5-10 years or so I think it will be struggle.

One of the big problems is all the infrastructure that has to change to accomodate the 380. I think it'll be hard to fill them too.

Boeing is going to have a field day-- 747 series is still going strong.

Answer 2

The A380 "White Elephant" will fail! It's just like the Concorde, only slower and fatter.

Already 747s are flying around the world on routes that are seldom full; if a route can't fill a 747, why is an A380 with more seats a good idea? people don't want to fly to a big airport then get connecting flights, they want to land as close to their destinations as possible. So I see more emphasis on the smaller aircraft, A320 and 737.

The cargo version is dead; FedEx and UPS both canceled their orders and the thing has been mothballed with claims that it will get started again someday.

Another problem: if an A380 needs to make an emergency landing because someone forgot to take their meds, the A380 will damage most runways. Runways must be strengthened to allow an A380 to land. Won't that be a neat news story when it first happens! And it will happen.

The employees are also a problem; they all have sweet deals forbidding getting laid off, so if orders are slow (as they are now) management can't stop paying them. German and French unions are now fuming over the restructuring; that can't help.

The one good thing going for Airbus is an almost inexaustable supply of free money from European states. They will just keep dumping money into it while at the same time they sue Microsoft for monopoly violations. Other than the free money, the A380 is in big trouble. No American airline has purchased one yet. Late fees this this year cost them $800 million!

Answer 3

Probably. The biggest unknown factor is what environmental policies will appear over the next 20 years or so (the realistic predicted duration for A380 and A380 derivative manufacturing -- the airplanes will be flying for longer).

For example, last month the UK doubled the passenger departure tax that you have to pay to fly from a British airport, on the basis of equalizing the environmental cost of flying. Now, that's a per-passenger tax, so it doesn't matter if you fly an A380 or a regional jet: each passenger pays a fixed amount.

BUT if the UK government had been interested in a fee structure that more accurately addressed the problem, it would have imposed a tax on the airlines (the operators of the aircraft), based on the number, age, size and type of the engines -- because it's not the airplane that pollutes, but the engines on the airplane! So an old four engine heavy aircaft would pay more than a newer, lighter twin. And the airlines would note that (say) a 220 seat B767-300 may pay only slightly less tax than a 300 seat B777-200, so the cost-per-passenger carried is reduced with the B777.

Now, if THAT happens (and Amsterdam's Schipol airport has something similar, but related to noise, not pollution), airlines would have to decide if they should use more smaller or fewer larger planes, and the 450 seat A380 would become an essential tool in their kitbag.

The other factor is airport capacity: as more and more airports reach their capacity limits, governments will either have to build new ones (hugely expensive and unpopular), limit traffic (economically troubling) or demand more efficiency from the airlines (with larger airplanes, more passengers per flight). Singapore and Sydney are both facing this issue, as is London Heathrow and New York JFK (but both of those have alternate airports available, such as Stansted and Newark).

So it's either going to be marginal or a success, depending on factors that have little to do with the airplane, and everything to do with the political climate in which the operators exist!

Answer 4

In my opinion, this aircraft (though it is a design wonder) is doomed from the start. Air travel because of costs involved and the security issues at airports has hampered the selling of seats. I think the short range work horse type aircraft will continue to bear the brunt of the business. Overseas flights will be handled by the A380 because Airbus will eventually figure all of the problems / difficulties out. I guess you could say it will be a success in the realm for which it was designed. I see more emphasis on the shorter distance flights to home in on economy and insurance that all seats are full to keep operating costs to a minimum.

Answer 5

A limited success, but only if Airbus really gets focused on rolling out the A380 without any further delays. I think its going to see the most success of heavily travelled routes like London to New York, but I see a bright future in cargo as well.
It all depends on Airbus not screwing anything up ever again.

Answer 6

No, they would make tons on the freighter but are pushing back the program and have lost hundreds of orders. They cost almost the same but are millions cheaper to make... Boeing got it right with the 747 and 777 freighers, those two aircraft alone account for over 50% of air cargo flights and boeing airplanes make up over 80% combined.

Answer 7

I believe it will be a success and the recent problems Airbus have encountered are just a blip.

Answer 8

No, not if airbus keeps delaying it. I think the Boeing 787 would be good though.