UPS is getting ready to cancel the last, remaining freighter order:

http://tinyurl.com/yosloe

and

Malaysia Air is "thinking":

http://tinyurl.com/2x8s37


Will this program ever fly???

No, it won't.

Many people have argued that the 747 was a dud when it first came out, and took a while to gain commercial success. And so will the 380, they say.

Unfortunately, they failed to realize the 747 may be ahead of its time, the 380 is already behind. The 787 and Airbus' own new 350XWB (or whatever it's called) will use a lot more composite material and new design. While the 380 can get more efficient engines later on, there are stuff in it that's old.

Its economics is no better than the 777-300 and not much better than the 747-8. If it had been out say 5 years ago, it would have been a mildly successful program, but not with the first delivery late this year and not many for next.

It's not the 1960's anymore and aircraft design don't last long today. Airbus' 340 program is totally finished, and so is Boeing's 717, 757, 767 (the last may survive with the tanker deal).

The 747 is an unique case. Its peers like the DC10/MD11 and the L1011 were not only dead, but so are their manufacturers. Saying the 380 will perform commercially like the 747 is fantasy.

The A380 should be a great success if they manage to use some of the extra space for comfort rather than cramming as many seats as possible onto it. Singapore Airlines will be a good test at the end of the year.

Extra space means nothing.

The 747 is the largest plane out there for almost 40 years. Airlines have put pianos, bars, whatever in it, but passengers want low price, and the 747 in coach is still more cramped than the Airbus in 8-abreast or 767 in 7-abreast or 777 in 8-abreast.

An airline doesn't buy the space on an A380 "for free". They need to get as much revenue from the aircrafts as possible.

And if you look at pictures, the lower deck of the A380 doesn't even look as spacious as the new 747-8's main deck, with lower ceiling and smaller overhead compartments. And upper deck doesn't look as spacious as a 767 or the 787.

How is it people keep insisting that all passengers want is low price, but all passengers complain about is being horribly cramped?

The issue is that no one truly offers a realistic choice. You can pay $300 to go cross-country chewing on your kneecaps in coach or $1000-plus in business/first -- and nothing in between (EXCEPT something like United's economy-plus, which is so popular with premier flyers, you can't easily get a seat there if you don't have priority.) Across an ocean means paying $1000 for the pleasure of being crammed into space the size of a auto trunk or $8000 for enough space up front.

If the A380 fails, it will partly be because it is just too unrealistically large -- a logistical challenge for all but a couple of airports and intimidating for passengers. Some have compared it to an ocean liner, but no one is forced to sit for hours in neat, tight rows on a cruise ship. Doesn't sound like a winning formula to me.

Choices? Yes, there were choices and they are still choices.

AA tried giving people more room, but they found out that couldn't charge people more.

Midwest Airlines (used to be called Midwest Express) has 2-2 seating on their MD88/717, but on many routes they have to put the 5th seat back, and now AirTran is trying to buy them up. If they had been so many passengers, MKE would be a huge hub and it would be Midwest buying AirTran, not the other way around.

But flying to Europe and Asia, you have premium economy on a variety of airlines already. And I'm sure some airline like Singapore will may put PE on their A380. But at the same time, the majority of travelers want low prices, so there will still be more economy seats on most routes.

So, please support those airlines that offer more room <b>by flying them, by buying Premium Economy seats.</b> The consumer has a say in it.

I think some points need to be made here.

The vast majority of the world's most profitable airlines have decided to buy the A380, they understand their market a lot better than people on Fodors.

No one to my knowledge, has published the interiors of Singapore's or any other airlines cabin mockup for the A380, so you're speculating.

Regular service airlines make the majority of their profits from Business and First Class, not economy

They are able to provide a great overall experience based on service, amenities, not just more leg room. In addition, this aircraft allows them to differentiate themselves even further and I know everyone is wondering what Emirates will do to upstage the competition.

Malaysian airlines are making very little money and are making significant cuts in routes. Therefore, the A380 business case is reduced as they have excess capacity.

The A380 is certainly causing excitement , as witnessed by the crowds greeting it, at each of its port of calls

Geordie

AA's mistake was that they gave everyone in economy more room. They should rethink having an Executive Economy section. There are many people who would be willing to pay a little extra for a few more inches, but they can't afford a couple thousand dollars to lay out and stretch.

Also, on AA's 777, there are two toilets for 18 people in first class; 3 toilets for 35 people in Business and 4 toilets in coach for 174 people.

I guess that is why they make people in coach pay for their drinks.

Also, in First Class that offer 92 inch pitch. How many people do you know that are 7 1/2 feet tall?

Singapore Airlines has a website devoted exclusively to the A380: www.a380.singaporeair.com
There are going to be far fewer seats on the aircraft than it is designed to hold, so I assume that the level of comfort, including for economy class, will be high.

Singapore Airlines had hugh signs up at London's Heathrow Airport during Christmas/New Year's. First airline to fly the A-380 from London to Singapore

SQ probably will have the whole upper deck for Raffles (business class), in a 1-2-1 configuration. They're introducing those seats first on their new 777-300ER, but should be the same seat that one sits straight but sleep at an angle. Those seats aren't very efficient for the 777, as that probably leave the aisles too wide, but are definitely designed for the A380.

But it's unclear whether they will be premium economy on these planes. SQ has not put them on anything other than their 5 A345s.

---

&quot;The vast majority of the world's most profitable airlines have decided to buy the A380, they understand their market a lot better than people on Fodors.&quot;

What airlines are those? Southwest? Ryanair? Cathay Pacific? British Airways? Fact is, if you subtract out Emirates, the planes has just over 100 order, with the number of customs shrinking and not expanding.

But anyways, I could be all wrong in this. BA and CX are going to place big order of long-haul planes this year. Maybe they will plane big order of the A380.

1. Premier economy/economy plus is only a true choice if it's available to everyone willing to pay extra. If it's routinely reserved for elite/premier travelers, it's just another level of business-class service and won't change anything about how coach travelers make their choices, because they don't have any choices.

2. Although maybe a bit unwieldy, it would be a great idea if the extra-space rows were distributed throughout the plane, rather than just clustered toward the front. The only reason to cluster them toward the front is if there will be a difference in treatment by the FAs. Otherwise, some people willing to pay more for more space (and skip the snack, please) may prefer to (or be willing to) sit toward the rear of the plane (near restrooms, etc.), while some people who have no need of extra room may have a reason to need to sit foward.

As so many of us keep saying, why not ask us before you start messing with your product? -- instead of doing something broad-sweep like &quot;More Room In Coach&quot; and then having to rescind it because you're going out of business. Trial and error without homework and planning is just &quot;flat stupid.&quot;

Or are coach travelers just another form of drag-along cargo? JetBlue didn't seem to think so.

Jetblue has been cutting back its expansion plans, and its recent announcement to remove seats is to:

- cut the number of flight attendants on each flight from 4 to 3.

- perhaps to avoid more of its west-bound transcon having to make fuel stops.

Now, I don't see having 3 flight attendants for 150 passengers as a service improvement to having 4 FAs for 156, do you?

---

UA's Economy Plus is available to anybody who'd pay $299 a year to get access for that passenger plus a travel companion.

The program should still be available, but UA's stopped promoting it.

Getting back to the original subject.

A380 is in DEEP trouble. Just because Qantas, British and Emirates, Singapore have some major orders doesen't mean anything. In fact Emirates is in negotiations with Boeing to replace their 43 A380 order with the new 748. If that happens that in effect may be getting close to being the last nail in the coffin. Emirates has the largest order for A380. Virgin delayed it's deliviers utill 2013. The one overlooked factor is that no airliner was ever succesful unless it had orders from Japan or the other major Asian countries. Not one of the Japanese majors placed an order and unless I'm wrong, the Chinese airlines didn't either. Big blow to Airbus as they were wining and dining the Asian airlines CEOs for many years and they actually thought they were close. There is a side story to this. Boeing agreed to have many of the major parts for many of their programs to be made by Japanese firms so the pressure is on to keep Boeing happy by the Japanese airlines, but nevertheless it's the reality.

With the A380 cargo version not having ANY orders at this time and the passenger version getting cancelled by the smaller airlines, the breaking point may be sooner than later.

viation investors specialist estimate that with all the cancellations, with all the delay penaltie$ Airbus has to pay to the airlines that are still &quot;waiting&quot;, it will take at least 1500+ copies of the plane just to break even on this program. At the moment the orders are in the low hundreds at best.

This has nothing to do with what the airlines know/not know, but a lot to do with your basic economic rules. Any corporation can sustain a loosing program for only so long before swallowing it's pride and declaring a dud. It will be a shame if it comes to that, because I for one would have loved to have flown that plane and healthy competition is always good, but it looks like Boeing is coming out a clear winner in this round. The 787 was a better idea to begin with and now they are just sticking a knife in the Airbus's back by enlarging and improving the trusted and proven 747. At one time Boeing said they will not do that and the 747 program was slowly coming to the end. What do you think is their main motivation behind changing their minds?

Have you forgotten that the 747 was not trusted at all when it first came out and most people claimed that they would never set foot on such a plane?

Big difference. The 747 had no competition at that time, the A380 does and it's available NOW, a proven and trusted and improved 747-800. The original 747 did not need to be an instant success, whereas the A380 needs to be, otherwise the impatiant airlines will run to what's available NOW. Different era, different needs. Can't compare how the the 2 programs started/start out.

Again, the A380 is &quot;old tech&quot;. It doesn't use a lot of composite material, it uses 4 engines. Only difference is that it's larger. It's behind its times, not ahead.

The 747 at least was up-to-date with its technology when it came out.

BTW, China Southern did order 5 copies.

Just to be clear: paying $299 for one year doesn't get you a guaranteed seat in UA Econ. Plus; it just gets you access to one if not already taken by premier/elite ff'ers.

As for the 380, it would have to be a very cushy AND less expensive flight to get me on a double-decker. For one thing, there's no such thing as diversion to another airport in an emergency -- well, there is, but you'll need chutes and ladders.

What I find comical is that people think the A380 is a &quot;revolutionary&quot; design. Anyone who knows anything about jetliner history knows that McDonnell-Douglas actually designed-- and rejected-- a double-decker, four-engine jumbo jet in the 1960s when working on the 747-fighter that ended up being the unlucky (but ultimately safe and tough-as-nails) DC-10.

The A380 is just bigger. And uglier. I doubt Airbus will ever see a profit on the program-- and I doubt they'd admit its failure (cross-reference: Concorde).