Similar Posts

Subscribe
Notify of
14 Answers
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
SirKermit
3 years ago

There is no real demand for these giants anymore. See https://www.flugrevue.de/zivil/corona-als-sargnagel-der-rasante-niedergang-des-airbus-a380/

and https://www.aerotelegraph.com/wo-der-airbus-a380-wann-verdesk

It was sometimes thought to fly larger amounts of passengers to hubs and to distribute them from there. But big airports want to be built.

RedPanther
3 years ago

The A380 is an economical and efficient aircraft – if you get it filled with passengers. And that’s the problem.

It is a flyer for the Rotary Cross Strategy: All passengers from Germany travel, for example, to Frankfurt/Main, then fly from there, for example, to Atlanta and then spread over the USA from there. Theoretically, it makes sense in this strategy to use very large aircraft between the turnstiles, which shove many passengers back and forth. Like the A380.

In practice, however, Point-to-pointDirect flights from Stuttgart to Dallas, a direct flight from Hamburg to Chicago, United States of America… This is not only more pleasant for the passengers, but also more economical, because slots and parking positions at large airports with dense traffic are significantly more expensive and are less fuel-intensive start-ups.

But: there are clearly fewer passengers per flight connection. You might get 250 passengers together 2x a week. Flying 250 passengers with an A380 would be a financial disaster… A significantly smaller 787, on the other hand, also causes so low costs that it is economically moving with 250 passengers. And no: You wouldn’t have 500 passengers in the plane if you were flying only 1x a week.

By the way, two engines each with 300 kN thrust (A330) are more favorable to operate than four engines each with 150 kN thrust (A340) – once the larger engines go a bit more efficiently with the fuel and, secondly, twice as many engines also produce twice as high maintenance costs. That is why the A330 was successful, but the A340 was not. Apart from the number of engines, both models are largely identical.

Sure, there are also connections between large turnstiles. But more passengers can be taken off when you fly daily instead of only every 2nd day. In addition, it costs a hot money to leave a plane unused on the ground. So you’d rather fly a plane for 350-400 passengers (Boeing 777) daily than sending a plane for 700 passengers to the trip every 2nd day.

archibaldesel
3 years ago

Of course, they are as long as the airlines continue to fly them. No new ones are built.

HatKeinPlan580
3 years ago

They are no longer produced because there is no more demand. And this is no longer because there are much more economical aircraft. A350 zB . And therefore many A380 will disappear and be replaced by others. Of course, they will be used for a long time on the ultra long distances with constant demand and high passenger numbers, because it is popular and also the largest aircraft.

Peppie85
3 years ago

no longer being built means there is no more. son fly keeps loose 40 years. also the A380. also spare parts etc. are made. only does the market no longer produce that further which will be built, as the customers already have enough of the dingers.

It could be critical if, for example, as in the case of the 737 max, they crash as standard. then theoretically it could be necessary again, but I assume that the DANN no longer wants to have.

lg, anna

SarahSchweiz
3 years ago

The WERDEN also used even longer – those who are already on the market anyway. And if not, they will have their reasons. Perhaps they have found that it is not worth building a large aircraft for over 850 people and have therefore stopped production.

DickerJunge175
3 years ago

The A380 is simply a dinosaur. His 4 engines need a lot of kerosene, but he can hardly transport more passengers than it can be about 787 or an A 350.

In addition, the trend towards smaller aircraft is due to the fact that more people are flying, but they are spread over more routes.

Dehslb is also planned for the 747 2022.

The latest aircraft, just like a 350 and 787, require only 2.5 litres of petrol equivalent per 100 passenger kilometers, and the 747 and a 380 cannot approach because of their double engine number.

Marionetto
3 years ago
Reply to  DickerJunge175

Sounds logical. Just, couldn’t you imagine? Why was the A380 built? So, finally, prestige?? 🤔

Encyclopedia
3 years ago
Reply to  Marionetto

Airbus set on lifting system, Boeing on Point to Point. Who can predict the future?

RedPanther
3 years ago
Reply to  DickerJunge175

However, it can hardly transport more passengers than it can be about a 787 or an A 350.

At Emirates, up to 615 seats. Boeing 787 goes up to 330 seats.

The problem is that you don’t get the places filled.

Lord2k14
3 years ago

You don’t get her full. Easy. There are no buyers.

ThadMiller
3 years ago

There is a lack of profitability. I don’t know whether it affects the farmer (airbus) or the customers.

MinecraftPro123
3 years ago

Because of Corona, the number of passengers is very low and few people fly. But there are good news the Airline Emirates has 117 A380 and buys even more A380 from e.g. Lufthansa. And I think Singapore Airlines will keep the A380. A380 is my favorite plane!

Jo3591
3 years ago

Perhaps we will see the A 380 for a long time after a change to the cargo aircraft. There are enough used airframes on the parking spaces with a few hours of flight that would be suitable for a conversion.