Aircraft fail due to technical reasons or market reasons or both (A380)

RichardAboulafia.com ^ | June 2006 Letter | Richard Aboulafia

[JRios1968]

[phantomworker]

I don't think any of them could compete against Boeing anymore. Lockheed never could and Boeing bought (merged) with McDonald Douglas. Embraer and Bombardier just doesn't have the capital to invest.

It would have to be a foreign country like Japan or heaven forbid, China. Canada, being socialist, would run the same problems as Airbus, don't you think?

Interesting to think about, though.

[phantomworker]

[paristwelve]

I hope the A380 gets off the ground because, for those long hauls, I'd like a roomy area with plenty of leg room at a resonable price.
Okay. I'm a dreamer.

[Uriah_lost]

Of all the listed planes, the one I couldn't understand flopping is the 717. It really had the performance, features and capacity to be the RJ killer it was billed as. I knew the A380 was doomed by the death of the hub and spoke model that began with deregulation here in the US.

[gridlock]

The A380 problems are much bigger than a big plane. France, Europe, heck, everywhere, needs to look at this experience and learn from it. Many governments monkey around with their nations’ industries. Many allow strategic planning and forecasting to be corrupted by politics.

That's it in a nutshell, IMHO. The decision to build the largest passenger aircraft in the World was a political decision. The strategic planning and forecasting was fudged after the fact to support that decision. The engineering was an afterthought.

[verity]

Aside from the content, this is a remarkably well written article.

[JRios1968]

Someone needs to send that to the US succer team.

[appeal2]

Absolutely correct. The 787 would not exist today without the benefit of Airbusts competition. Neither would the 777 or fly by wire and a host of other innovations. However, what do we need is to get the government out of the subsidy Olympics. The market needs to figure all of this stuff out on its own. Airbust was a government creation to smash Boeings dominance. For a while it seemed to be working. However, it never really was profitable regardless what the numbers said. They never properly amortized development costs and subsidies. It was always just an illusion. But the 320 and 330 were wake up calls for Boeing that it had to do things differently and it worked.

We need two aircraft manufacturers, but they need to non-governmental entities and say what you want but Airbust is a governmental ego booster program.

[Mr. Jeeves]

Of all the listed planes, the one I couldn't understand flopping is the 717. It really had the performance, features and capacity to be the RJ killer it was billed as.

I got the impression the Boeing execs just didn't like having any McDonnell-Douglas designs remaining in the portfolio and preferred to focus their customers on the 737-700. They seem not to want to compete with RJ manufacturers at all.

Whatever the 797 turns out to look like, Boeing needs to really focus on delivering it as soon as possible after the 787 rolls out. The A320 and its variants are very popular with US airlines, and Airbus stole a lot of potential 737 sales in the 90's. If Airbus can come out with a fuel-efficient successor in that class before Boeing does (they shouldn't even waste time on an early rollout of the A350 at this point - just take the time to get that one right) they could easily maintain their market share and not be hurt much by the failure of the A380.

The A380 looks like it might be headed for a Concorde-like future - maybe a dozen in passenger service as novelty ultra-luxury aircraft. I could see Singapore Airlines using an all-first-class A380 to carry about 100 people between Singapore and San Francisco in ocean liner-like luxury at very high fares. And I could see a Chinese airline cramming 1,000 seats into one and using it for Beijing-Shanghai commute runs. A future cargo variant might help Airbus stem the losses a bit.

[pepperdog]

Amen!

[SW6906]

"Aside from the content, this is a remarkably well written article."

Sarcasm? Or would you care to elaborate?

[SW6906]

Airbus has sold a number of A380 freighter versions, UPS is an early customer, IIRC. Their website unfortunately doesn't split out the versions in their sales figures (such as they are).

[Yo-Yo]

I keep looking for those fins on the 380, they must be somewhere.

Look on the wingtips.

[Yo-Yo]

What would Boeing do without a competitor?

Boeing had a competitor:

[Yo-Yo]

Of all the listed planes, the one I couldn't understand flopping is the 717. It really had the performance, features and capacity to be the RJ killer it was billed as. I knew the A380 was doomed by the death of the hub and spoke model that began with deregulation here in the US.

The death of the hub and spoke model also killed the regional jet market.

[verity]

Poor choice of words on my part.

It is a GREAT analysis. Moreover, it is remarkably well written. [The author seems to have a natural gift for written communication.]

OK?

[garyhope]

Even less desire to fly with another 799+.

As a somewhat slightly "older" gentleman and having to use the "facilities" slightly more often than the younger generation, can you imagine waiting in line with another couple of hundred people for the loo? And what shape will it be in when you get to it? No thanks.

[SW6906]

OK, now I understand your point. Thanks for clearing that up! ;o)

[JeffersonRepublic.com]

[ Oh, this is just the introductory small version. The A380-900 is supposed to carry 800+ passengers.]

Maybe, maybe not! I believe that the A380 is grossly overweight, and the passenger capacity will be reduced.