Airbus Is Giving Up On the A380 (cnn.com)

"It's the end of the line for the biggest passenger jet ever built: the A380 is going to cease production," writes Slashdot reader Required Snark, citing a report from CNN. From the report: The European plane maker said Thursday that it will stop delivering A380s in 2021 after its key customer, Dubai-based airline Emirates, slashed its orders for the huge jetliner. "We have no substantial A380 backlog and hence no basis to sustain production, despite all our sales efforts with other airlines in recent years," Airbus CEO Tom Enders said in a company statement. The company has delivered 234 of the superjumbos to date, less than a quarter of the 1,200 it predicted it would sell when it first introduced the double-decker aircraft. Its plans were undermined by airlines shifting their interest to lighter, more fuel efficient passenger jets that have reduced the need to ferry passengers between the big hubs. "Passengers all over the world love to fly on this great aircraft. Hence today's announcement is painful for us and the A380 communities worldwide," Enders said. "But keep in mind that A380s will still roam the skies for many years to come and Airbus will of course continue to fully support the A380 operators."

Comments

Re:So the industry

[dwywit]

-1 Try again.

Hint: stick to one point per sentence, and avoid hyperbole.

Re:There is a market for huge planes, in theory

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. It's okay at London Heathrow or Dubai, where half a dozen of the monsters can be fitted together as they take off and land, but for everywhere else the wake turbulence is an issue that reduces the number of aircraft movements and hence the number of passengers that can be accommodated.

It would be easier in a theoretical world for all the smaller jets (737s and A320s) to use one runway for both takeoffs and landings, and the larger planes to use the other runway, but in the real world that's even more difficult to organise.

Who says direct is more expensive?

[Anonymous Coward]

Direct is faster but more expensive.

Obligatory Wendover Productions video.

And if you don't have 10 minutes to kill, here's the moral of the story: When airplanes are full, direct is always cheaper. You pay for less fuel, less labor, less airplane flight time (maintenance), less airport fees, etc. But the challenge has always been filling seats for low-demand routes. Airport logistics aside, you can't fly an A380 between Raleigh, NC, and Dublin, Ireland, because there's not that much demand. And smaller planes couldn't fly over the Atlantic. Hence the need for the hub-and-spoke model of flying: small planes to and from hubs, and large airplanes between hubs.

But now small airplanes -can- fly over the Atlantic. What Airbus loses in the A380, it gains in the Airbus A220, a.k.a. the Bombardier C-Series. (Another obligatory Wendover Productions video.) Now here's a narrow-body airplane that seats 100-130 passengers that -can- fly across the Atlantic, making direct flights between small markets possible. And as December 2018, Airbus has over 500 orders for the airplane, with demand for the airplane continuing to grow. Best yet: Boeing has no competitor to this class of airplane. Airbus has a monopoly on this class of airplane, and it's going to make them rich.

Re:There is a market for huge planes, in theory

[thereddaikon]

It does appear to be a reaction if you look at the timelines. The 787 was flying before the first A350 was even produced. Its definitely not a case of Airbus seeing the success of the 787 and following suite. But it probably is a case of Airbus hearing about the 787 while still in development (they start hawking these things to customers years in advance) and decided to get in on that segment as well. In fact if you look at the wiki article the narrative seems to be that the A350 is definitely a reaction to the 787. Airbus initially wanted to ignore it but was pressured into developing a competitor by its customers. They probably shouldn't have listened though. They've sold a fraction of the things compared to the 787.

Re:There is a market for huge planes, in theory

[MightyYar]

At least read the Wikipedia entry before accusing us of talking shit.

Airbus initially rejected Boeing's claim that the Boeing 787 Dreamliner would be a serious threat to the Airbus A330, stating that the 787 was just a reaction to the A330 and that no response was needed. When airlines urged Airbus to provide a competitor, Airbus initially proposed the "A330-200Lite", a derivative of the A330 featuring improved aerodynamics and engines similar to those on the 787.[10] The company planned to announce this version at the 2004 Farnborough Airshow, but did not proceed.[10]

The initial A350 concept, based on the A330
On 16 September 2004, Airbus president and chief executive officer Noël Forgeard confirmed the consideration of a new project during a private meeting with prospective customers.[10] Forgeard did not give a project name, and he did not state whether it would be an entirely new design or a modification of an existing product. Airline dissatisfaction with this proposal motivated Airbus to commit €4 billion to a new airliner design.[10]

The original version of the A350 superficially resembled the A330 due to its common fuselage cross-section and assembly. A new wing, engines, and a horizontal stabiliser–to be coupled with new composite materials and production methods applied to the fuselage–would make the A350 an almost all-new aircraft.[10] On 10 December 2004, the boards of EADS and BAE Systems, then the shareholders of Airbus, gave Airbus an "authorisation to offer" (ATO) and formally named it the A350.[10][11][12]