archBOSTON.org

Go Back   archBOSTON.org > Boston's Built Environment > Transit and Infrastructure

Transit and Infrastructure All things T or civilly engineered within Boston Metro.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-14-2019, 05:12 AM   #4001
stellarfun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: salem ma and washington dc
Posts: 4,499
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Airbus is ceasing production of the A380. Last deliveries in 2021, apparently to Emirates.
__________________
A man gazing on the stars is at the mercy of the puddles in the road
stellarfun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2019, 10:37 AM   #4002
dshoost88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,473
Re: Logan Flight Additions

^^Damn... at least we locked in A380 service from a couple airlines before they disappear entirely.
dshoost88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2019, 10:44 AM   #4003
HelloBostonHi
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 35
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by stellarfun View Post
Airbus is ceasing production of the A380. Last deliveries in 2021, apparently to Emirates.
Although its sad, it makes sense the turnaround time of a380s was massive, the flight crew was massive, airports had to redesign gates for it, and it just doesn't fit the new trend of direct flights between smaller locations, it was solidly built in the age of hub and spoke flights...

Now, I must get myself on an a380 in the next 20 years or so before they start being phased out, I've done pretty much every other plane but a380s rarely fly just transatlantic hops that I'm flying...
HelloBostonHi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2019, 10:56 AM   #4004
cadetcarl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Boston/Medford
Posts: 308
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelloBostonHi View Post
Now, I must get myself on an a380 in the next 20 years or so before they start being phased out
I read this as "I must get myself an A380", as if it were a used car you could pick up once the airlines eat the depreciation hit. No tire-kickers please, I know what I got.
cadetcarl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2019, 11:42 AM   #4005
mass88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,889
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Not surprising. The entire A380 program has been a failure. Not a single commercial airline in North America, South America or Africa bought the plane. It has a purpose in a very small segment of air routes, hardly enough to keep the program going.
mass88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2019, 11:47 AM   #4006
CSTH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,758
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by stellarfun View Post
Airbus is ceasing production of the A380. Last deliveries in 2021, apparently to Emirates.
Too many engines per passenger....
CSTH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 10:26 AM   #4007
Lrfox
Senior Member
 
Lrfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,301
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSTH View Post
Too many engines per passenger....
Huh? The typical A380 has four engines and carries about 575 passengers. That's 144 passengers per engine. The 737 Max 8 has 2 engines and typically carries about 162 passengers. That's 81 passengers per engine. The 737 is the best selling plane of all time, and the Max variant has over 5,000 orders. There are currently more 737 Maxes in service (over 330) than there were total orders for A380s (313). The Max has been produced for 5 years, the A380 has been produced for nearly 16.

The issue isn't "engines per passenger." It's a complete misfire in terms of understanding which direction the industry was heading. It has been trending towards direct flights on smaller/more efficient aircraft vs. hub/spoke systems with A380/747 type aircraft doing the hub to hub flying. The 787, the MAX, the A350, the A220, etc. are all doing it right. The A380 was doomed from the start.
Lrfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 10:49 AM   #4008
Beton Brut
Senior Member
 
Beton Brut's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Orient Heights
Posts: 4,120
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lrfox View Post
The A380 was doomed from the start.
Sadly, this is spot on. No matter what, it's a magnificent piece of engineering, likely the last of its kind in terms of scale.
__________________
This discussion has gone on far too long. Someone might wander by and get the impression that this is an architecture forum.

~ Justin7
Beton Brut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 02:23 PM   #4009
jass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,195
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lrfox View Post
It's a complete misfire in terms of understanding which direction the industry was heading. It has been trending towards direct flights on smaller/more efficient aircraft vs. hub/spoke systems.
Yes and no.

There was a similar collapse at the other end of the scale. If my memory is correct, Alaska is the only major US airline still flying turboprops, which are actually more efficient than jet engines at the size category. And the ones they do fly are big.

The US industry has been moving to wipe out all aircraft below 76 seats, which in turn means the elimination of direct flights to smaller markets. Instead, those folks are being asked to drive to a larger regional airport.

American Eagle, for example, had a fleet of 100 Saab 340 planes, which held ~35 passengers. No major airline brand is flying that size anymore.

And before someone rushes in and says Cape Air...

Cape Air is not a major airline.
jass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 03:39 PM   #4010
millerm277
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 152
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by jass View Post
There was a similar collapse at the other end of the scale. If my memory is correct, Alaska is the only major US airline still flying turboprops, which are actually more efficient than jet engines at the size category. And the ones they do fly are big.
Turboprops are doing fine in other markets worldwide though, that's largely specific to the US market.

The A380 (obviously) wasn't.
millerm277 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 03:44 PM   #4011
CSTH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,758
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lrfox View Post
Huh? The typical A380 has four engines and carries about 575 passengers. That's 144 passengers per engine. The 737 Max 8 has 2 engines and typically carries about 162 passengers. That's 81 passengers per engine. The 737 is the best selling plane of all time, and the Max variant has over 5,000 orders. There are currently more 737 Maxes in service (over 330) than there were total orders for A380s (313). The Max has been produced for 5 years, the A380 has been produced for nearly 16.

The issue isn't "engines per passenger." ...
Ok. I'm no expert here.

But the A380 wasn't competing with the 737. It was competing with the 777, mostly. And a 777 can give you almost 400 pax on 2 engines. There have been 2,000 orders for 777s.

The reason that's relevant, btw, is lower maintenance cost per per passenger mile.

(That's why almost no one bought new 747s either, and that line is being retired as well....)
CSTH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 03:46 PM   #4012
Lrfox
Senior Member
 
Lrfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,301
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by jass View Post
Yes and no.

There was a similar collapse at the other end of the scale. If my memory is correct, Alaska is the only major US airline still flying turboprops, which are actually more efficient than jet engines at the size category. And the ones they do fly are big.

The US industry has been moving to wipe out all aircraft below 76 seats, which in turn means the elimination of direct flights to smaller markets. Instead, those folks are being asked to drive to a larger regional airport.

American Eagle, for example, had a fleet of 100 Saab 340 planes, which held ~35 passengers. No major airline brand is flying that size anymore.

And before someone rushes in and says Cape Air...

Cape Air is not a major airline.
Not wrong, but the reasoning is different and not as big a mark against the utility of turboprop aircraft. Turboprops are very effective on short hops and they're extremely popular worldwide on these routes. Sometimes more efficient than regional jets. However, they're not as versatile as regional jets in U.S. markets. For example, the E-175 has a range that's double that of a Q400. So that range opens up a lot more route opportunities for an airline like American Eagle. Economically, it makes sense to buy one plane that can fly LGA to SYR or ORD to FAT (both actual flights operated by E-175 aircraft) than different planes for each route.

Turboprops, especially the larger ones (like the Q400) still serve an important niche on short hauls and regional routes. Alaska uses them still obviously, and Porter (yes, not a U.S. airline) has done exceptionally well with theirs. You see turboprops all over Europe with its dense clusters of populated areas. But for the U.S. which has dense clusters along the coast, it makes more sense to use the regional jets which can serve the dense clusters, but also work on longer routes outside of those clusters.

The A380 doesn't have as strong of a niche. It's good on the busiest hub to hub routes. That's about it. If it weren't for Emirates, which accounts for more than 1/2 of the A380 orders, it probably would have died a long time ago.
Lrfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 04:01 PM   #4013
Lrfox
Senior Member
 
Lrfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,301
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSTH View Post
Ok. I'm no expert here.

But the A380 wasn't competing with the 737. It was competing with the 777, mostly. And a 777 can give you almost 400 pax on 2 engines. There have been 2,000 orders for 777s.

The reason that's relevant, btw, is lower maintenance cost per per passenger mile.

(That's why almost no one bought new 747s either, and that line is being retired as well....)
Right, That makes sense. The industry is definitely trending toward the more efficient 2-engine aircraft on long-haul routes. I just don't think "passengers per engine" is metric anyone would use. Cost per passenger is dead on.

But the A380 was aiming to cater to what Airbus felt was a previously untapped market. In a normal 2 or 3 class config., the 777 is still carrying about 150-200 fewer passengers than an A380. And the 777 was around long before the A380 was. So again, it was a misfire in identifying the market direction. At least with the 747 which has been around nearly 50 largely successful years, you can make the case for obsolescence (and the 747-8F is still very successful). The 777 came about as a challenger to the tri-engine widebodies (DC-10 and L1011) because Boeing realized that the future of long haul travel will require a more efficient aircraft. Airbus had the success of the 777 to look at (the 777 launched in the mid-90s) and still thought the whale had the potential to be a big success. It was a mistake.
Lrfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 04:49 PM   #4014
North Shore
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 90
Re: Logan Flight Additions

So, my question regarding the demise of the A380 is this: With BA and Emirates being the only two carriers to fly the 380 in/out of Logan, does is make sense for the Terminal E expansion to accommodate 380s to the degree that the plans currently call for, given that they might be flying for another 10-15 years, max or should they revise the plans for greater accommodation of 787s and 350s instead?
North Shore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 04:59 PM   #4015
CSTH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,758
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Hasn't the super-jumbo part of the expansion already been built?
CSTH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2019, 05:51 PM   #4016
mass88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,889
Re: Logan Flight Additions

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSTH View Post
Hasn't the super-jumbo part of the expansion already been built?
Massport finished the rebuild of gates E10-12 to make them capable of handling the A380. It also included 3 new airline clubs that British Airways, Lufthansa and Emirates have taken. Lufthansa is yet to bring the A380 to Boston. British Airways is the only of the three to have regular scheduled service. Someone can correct if Emirates has regular schedule service with the A380.
mass88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2019, 07:28 AM   #4017
TallIsGood
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 330
Re: Logan Flight Additions

There was an Emirates A380 there yesterday afternoon when I came in from London on a BA 747. Not sure how often the Emirates A380 is scheduled though.
TallIsGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2019, 09:47 AM   #4018
atlantaden
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: atlanta
Posts: 1,871
Re: Logan Flight Additions

https://travelingformiles.com/emirat...ter-2019-2020/

There ya go! Thank you Google!
atlantaden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2019, 10:25 PM   #4019
AdamBC
Senior Member
 
AdamBC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Brookline
Posts: 569
Re: Logan Flight Additions

As someone who grew up in fly-over country, I can promise you that as soon as the first 1+2 configured ERJs came to my airport, I made sure to only fly those airlines. I refused to fly US Air for the longest time because of how long they kept turboprops as a major proportion of flights to my local airport. Those things were loud in the cabin, they flew much lower (and the air always seemed more choppy below the clouds). While turboprops may be more efficient than regional jets, I presume I was not alone in doing my part to nudge the airlines to move from prop to the small RJ option.
AdamBC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:55 AM   #4020
Arlington
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: West Medford, MA
Posts: 3,505
Re: Logan Flight Additions

In what go down in business-forecasting history as one of the finest forecasts (by Boeing) and worst* forecasts (by Airbus) of market demand:
Quote:
Boeing estimated that demand for super jumbo aircraft would amount to 250 units while Airbus thought the market would total 1,000.
per John Walsh, quoted by Forbes in How Boeing Lured Airbus Into Now-Busted A380

Boeing's estimate, developed between 1995 and 2000, foresaw 250 super jumbos. Airbus, utterly captivated by confirmation bias and over-optimism, would only "see" data that confirmed its desire to produce the World's Largest Aircraft.

As of the announced cancellation of the program (now), Airbus has delivered 234 and will build another 17 before the line closes, for a total production of, as Boeing foresaw: 251.

Ok, technically, the Boeing "250" forecast would have included the market for its 747-8 (130 delivered, 24 to be built). So Boeing's 250 is low versus about 400 super jumbos produced since 2005. But *everyone* (except Airbus' management) knew that the A380 would cost them dearly and never produce enough units to pay back its development costs.

*Airbus' worst is worse than Lockheed's decision to build the L-1011, which while a wonderful plane, near-bankrupted Lockheed (together with the bribes they paid the Japanese to buy it) drove Lockheed out of commercial aviation .
__________________
"Trying to solve congestion by making roadways wider is like trying to solve obesity by buying bigger pants."--Charles Marohn

Last edited by Arlington; Yesterday at 11:13 AM.
Arlington is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
If Logan Airport were moved.... JS38 Development Projects 26 11-24-2008 05:25 PM
New Logan 9/11 Monument bostonman Development Projects 28 09-12-2008 01:55 PM
More international carrier gates at Logan stellarfun Transit and Infrastructure 13 06-09-2008 02:03 PM
If We Moved Logan Airport... Waldorf General Architecture & Urban Planning 4 04-05-2007 04:25 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.