Oversize Expectations for the Airbus A380

[PHLBOS]

The A380 is a "Halo" Model for airbus, basically, it is there to sell the smaller aircraft. it is like the Dodge Viper, Ford GT40, Chevrolet Corvette, it sells the lower end models. "look at what they can do with a huge aircraft... i bet their smaller stuff is just as good" The money has always been in the small to mid sized aircraft,

Quite true.

the 747 was never expected to turn a profit as a passenger jet, yet it did, and then some as a freighter.

As I mentioned earlier, the airline industry was completely different (read "Regulated") when the 747 first rolled out.  Nearly every major airline had at least one in their fleet.  However, once the slightly smaller DC-10s & L-1011s rolled out; many carriers dropped the 747 for those widebodies instead.  Today, most carriers that once flew DC-10s (later MD-11s) & L-1011s now fly 767s, 777s and/or A330s.  The limited-production stretched 767-400 that rolled out over a decade ago, was specifically geared for Continental & Delta to replace their DC-10s & L-1011s respectively.

Boeing makes their money on the 737/767/777.

IIRC, passenger 767 production stopped several years ago in favor of the newer 787 and new-build cargo-freight 767 production may be winding down as well.  Boeing's primary bread-winner is indeed the current 737* (aka 737NG).

*includes 737-600, 737-700, 737-800 & 737-900. 

The 747 is not that widely ordered any more; since everyone that wants/needs one, already has one.

FTFY.

[SteveG1988]

The A380 is a "Halo" Model for airbus, basically, it is there to sell the smaller aircraft. it is like the Dodge Viper, Ford GT40, Chevrolet Corvette, it sells the lower end models. "look at what they can do with a huge aircraft... i bet their smaller stuff is just as good" The money has always been in the small to mid sized aircraft,

Quite true.

the 747 was never expected to turn a profit as a passenger jet, yet it did, and then some as a freighter.

As I mentioned earlier, the airline industry was completely different (read "Regulated") when the 747 first rolled out.  Nearly every major airline had at least one in their fleet.  However, once the slightly smaller DC-10s & L-1011s rolled out; many carriers dropped the 747 for those widebodies instead.  Today, most carriers that once flew DC-10s (later MD-11s) & L-1011s now fly 767s, 777s and/or A330s.  The limited-production stretched 767-400 that rolled out over a decade ago, was specifically geared for Continental & Delta to replace their DC-10s & L-1011s respectively.

Boeing makes their money on the 737/767/777.

IIRC, passenger 767 production stopped several years ago in favor of the newer 787 and new-build cargo-freight 767 production may be winding down as well.  Boeing's primary bread-winner is indeed the current 737* (aka 737NG).

*includes 737-600, 737-700, 737-800 & 737-900. 

The 747 is not that widely ordered any more; since everyone that wants/needs one, already has one.

FTFY.

The 767 production line was saved by the KC-46/KC-767. the 767 has only one major flaw, it's small. It is barely wider than a 737/757. The A380 will probably go down as a great "Marvel" like Concorde. A plane for the history books, that proved not all that useful in the long run.

I see the A380 staying in production til 2025, before it is replaced with a newer twin jet widebody, something along the lines of the 777 in size, maybe a little wider.

[Brandon]

Boeing makes their money on the 737/767/777.

IIRC, passenger 767 production stopped several years ago in favor of the newer 787 and new-build cargo-freight 767 production may be winding down as well.  Boeing's primary bread-winner is indeed the current 737* (aka 737NG).

*includes 737-600, 737-700, 737-800 & 737-900. 

And it's exactly that market that's heating up with competition.  You have the 737 family and the A320 family, as well as a host of other airplane manufacturers making their own in the class:

Bombardier C-Series
Embraer E-190 and E-195
Comac C919
Irkut MC-21

I suspect that the 737-sized plane is probably the plane of the future, not the A380 or even the 747-sized planes.  Currently, the 737 is the best selling commercial jet airliner ever, and the A320 family sells as fast as they can make them.  The A380 strikes me as a mistake.  It looks good, like the Concorde before it, but I strongly suspect Airbus misread the market on this one.  As 737-sized aircraft gain in efficiency and range, I suspect that they will become the primary go-to aircraft for most operations.

[SteveG1988]

Boeing makes their money on the 737/767/777.

IIRC, passenger 767 production stopped several years ago in favor of the newer 787 and new-build cargo-freight 767 production may be winding down as well.  Boeing's primary bread-winner is indeed the current 737* (aka 737NG).

*includes 737-600, 737-700, 737-800 & 737-900. 

And it's exactly that market that's heating up with competition.  You have the 737 family and the A320 family, as well as a host of other airplane manufacturers making their own in the class:

Bombardier C-Series
Embraer E-190 and E-195
Comac C919
Irkut MC-21

I suspect that the 737-sized plane is probably the plane of the future, not the A380 or even the 747-sized planes.  Currently, the 737 is the best selling commercial jet airliner ever, and the A320 family sells as fast as they can make them.  The A380 strikes me as a mistake.  It looks good, like the Concorde before it, but I strongly suspect Airbus misread the market on this one.  As 737-sized aircraft gain in efficiency and range, I suspect that they will become the primary go-to aircraft for most operations.

A 737 sized aircraft already IS the go-to aircraft.

Boeing did drop the ball on this one though, they discontinued the 717 (DC-9-95/MD95/1990s DC-9) in 2006, which is almost perfect for the sub 737 size. Now you got the COMAC ARJ-21 which IS DC-9 based, it uses tooling from the MD-90 that was left in china back in the 1990s. They claim it is all new, but everyone knows it is a MD-90/DC9 family member. That isn't a bad thing though, if it proves itself i could see it becoming a contender in the US market.

[PHLBOS]

Boeing did drop the ball on this one though, they discontinued the 717 (DC-9-95/MD95/1990s DC-9) in 2006, which is almost perfect for the sub 737 size.

Note: the DC-9 designation was dropped after the MD-88s & MD-90s came about.  The only MD-80s that officially carried the DC-9 designation was the MD-81 through 87 (aka DC-9-81 through DC-9-87).  McDonnell-Douglass (aka MDD) officially called the MD-95 that (no DC-9-95).

The whole MD-95/717 saga stems from bad timing.  The intended mission for that particular aircraft (which was originally planned for 3 lengths) was to replace the old 737s (-100 & -200), DC-9s & F-100s that many carriers were still flying at the time.  However, many carriers (mostly legacy carriers like US Airways, Delta, American, etc.) were using smaller regional jets (aka RJs) flown by regional/commuter affiliates/partners for those routes.  OTOH, Northwest, which had a boatload of 2nd-hand DC-9s at the time and viewed as a prime candidate for the MD-95/717, decided to keep flying their paid-off DC-9s instead of leasing new aircraft to the very end.

Due to many carriers' scope clauses, the MD-95/717 was considered a mainline jet rather than a regional jet and had to be operated by mainline crews (which were paid higher wages than regional airline crews); and, as a result, demand for the MD-95/717 reached nowhere nears its anticipated demand.  BTW scope clauses are determined by passenger-capacity minimums; most carriers in the US had passenger capacity cut-off ranging from 85(?) to 100 passengers.  Any plane carrying less than such, was flown by a regional affiliate.

Compounding the matter was the fact that both the manufacturer (MDD) of the type and its launch customer (ValuJet) underwent mergers with Boeing & AirTran respectively within a 2-year period (1996-1998).  Boeing bought out MDD (mainly for its defense aircraft) and ValuJet aquired AirTran and took on its name (following the negative press after the 1996 crash of Flight 592 in the Everglades).  Since the number of MD-95/717 orders (both firm & options) exceeded 200 frames (AirTran's & TWA's firm/option order alone totalled 200); Boeing initially decided to allow production since the on-paper orders exceeded the break-even production number (which IIRC was 200).  In addition to AirTran & TWA; many other carriers that flew DC-9s (Hawaiian & Midwest (aka Midwest Express) in the US) ordered the 717 and used them to replace their older DC-9s.  In contrast, Boeing promptly notified its MD-80, MD-90 & MD-11 customers that it was shutting production of those types down (the last MD-83 for TWA rolled out of Long Beach in 1999); mainly because those types were direct competitors to its 737NG, 767 & even some of the 777 lines (the shorter 777-200).

Trouble for the 717 production came in 2000-2001 when American Airlines aquired TWA and subsequently cancelled the TWA's remaining order for the type (30 planes were already delivered at the time).  American decided to continue using its older, paid-for but more-orphaned (in terms of support) F-100 instead and returned the 717s to Boeing; most of which wound up going to AirTran.  This plus the economic slowdown that followed 9/11/2001 basically reduced/eliminated the 717's customer base and demand for the type.  Several carriers that could have been potential 717 customers (ATA as one example) went into bankrupcy & didn't survive.  Many foreign carriers that flew the 717 died off as well (Impulse being an early example).

Come 2003, once Boeing was able to convince (some say twist arms with) AirTran (by this time it was the largest 717 operator) to opt for the 737-700 rather than the not-yet-produced 717-300 (a stretched variant of the base 717-200 & roughly the size of the old DC-9-50 series) for its larger plane; they were able to close the production line down.

By the time other carriers realized the 717's potential (some say American later regretted returning their inherited 717s, they later retired their F-100s); production had already shut down and the Long Beach plant was sold off.  One report commented that in hindsight, Boeing should've given production approval of the shortened 717-100 variant (which was about the size of the old DC-9-10 series) to combat the regional/commuter aircraft market.

Anyway, and I realize that the above is a large tangent with the topic matter of the A380, had the MD-95/717 been lauched earlier (pre-RJ-boom); it might be still produced today.

Total 717 production was only 156 frames; 87 of which were flown by AirTran and are now going to Delta. 

Southwest, which recently aquired AirTran, announced early on in the merger that they would not integrate the 717 into their system (they want to maintain their all-one-fleet-type status (such means lower costs)).  They unloaded them to Delta for cheap money.

[SteveG1988]

Phlbos, I've seen your name on airliners.net, took me a bit to realize it. Used to be a first class member there.

I see the a380 as having one use that has yet to be touched on. Mobile office/hospital. Imagine if a disaster happens, fly the a380 to the nearest compatible airport and basically use it as a medical center. Or let's says big company is starting operations in a new country. Fly a a380 equipped like an office and rent out some tarmac while the real building is being worked on.

Also, I'd like to see one be given to the red cross for evacuation flights, configured in max passenger configuration. Operation baby lift type stuff.

[PHLBOS]

Phlbos, I've seen your name on airliners.net, took me a bit to realize it.

That site introduced me to internet forum boards.  I've been on there since 2004 and created my username from a airline route that I would fly between my current and original home airports (PHL-BOS).

I see the a380 as having one use that has yet to be touched on. Mobile office/hospital. Imagine if a disaster happens, fly the a380 to the nearest compatible airport and basically use it as a medical center. 
...
Also, I'd like to see one be given to the red cross for evacuation flights, configured in max passenger configuration. Operation baby lift type stuff.

A few years back, Airliners magazine had an article involving 2nd-hand L-1011s being used for such purposes.

[SteveG1988]

Phlbos, I've seen your name on airliners.net, took me a bit to realize it.

That site introduced me to internet forum boards.  I've been on there since 2004 and created my username from a airline route that I would fly between my current and original home airports (PHL-BOS).

I see the a380 as having one use that has yet to be touched on. Mobile office/hospital. Imagine if a disaster happens, fly the a380 to the nearest compatible airport and basically use it as a medical center. 
...
Also, I'd like to see one be given to the red cross for evacuation flights, configured in max passenger configuration. Operation baby lift type stuff.

A few years back, Airliners magazine had an article involving 2nd-hand L-1011s being used for such purposes.

The l1011 has that lower deck lounge area, could be useful to help board evac patients. Sadly the l1011 is practically dead, only like 5 left flying.

[realjd]

I see 747 and A380 aircraft continuing to be used for niche markets like LAX-SYD and JFK-DXB with high volume but an infrequent schedule due to time zones. I see the 777, 787, A330, and A350 as the go-to widebody long haul jets for most routes.

Is the 737 ETOPS certified like the 757 is? I see a need for 737/757/767 sized aircraft in the TATL market because it lets the airlines run more frequent, smaller planes with a wider variety of schedules. That's why DL uses exclusively 763/764 aircraft on all flights to LHR. It lets them have non-stops from every hub, and multiple flights with different schedules from places like JFK and ATL.

I'm sad to see the 757 being phased out in favor of the 737. 737s feel cramped to me, and I'll miss getting to turn left on boarding to take my seat up front in F. Because of the 2L door they also tended to have a better ratio of F to Y seats which meant easier upgrades than on the 737.

[SteveG1988]

I see 747 and A380 aircraft continuing to be used for niche markets like LAX-SYD and JFK-DXB with high volume but an infrequent schedule due to time zones. I see the 777, 787, A330, and A350 as the go-to widebody long haul jets for most routes.

Is the 737 ETOPS certified like the 757 is? I see a need for 737/757/767 sized aircraft in the TATL market because it lets the airlines run more frequent, smaller planes with a wider variety of schedules. That's why DL uses exclusively 763/764 aircraft on all flights to LHR. It lets them have non-stops from every hub, and multiple flights with different schedules from places like JFK and ATL.

I'm sad to see the 757 being phased out in favor of the 737. 737s feel cramped to me, and I'll miss getting to turn left on boarding to take my seat up front in F. Because of the 2L door they also tended to have a better ratio of F to Y seats which meant easier upgrades than on the 737.

Oddly the 707/727/737/757 all share the same upper fuselage, the 737 has a model that is almost as big as a 757, only difference is that it sits lower to the ground, and has smaller engines.

[PHLBOS]

Oddly the 707/727/737/757 all share the same upper fuselage, the 737 has a model that is almost as big as a 757, only difference is that it sits lower to the ground, and has smaller engines.

The 707/727/737 share the same exact nose as well.

Tid bit & based on Boeing's own specs.: the largest 737, the 737-900, has a length of roughly 138'.  The 757-200 had a length of about 155' and both the 707 & 727-200 had a length of about 153'.

[Pete from Boston]

I see 747 and A380 aircraft continuing to be used for niche markets like LAX-SYD and JFK-DXB with high volume but an infrequent schedule due to time zones. I see the 777, 787, A330, and A350 as the go-to widebody long haul jets for most routes.

Is the 737 ETOPS certified like the 757 is? I see a need for 737/757/767 sized aircraft in the TATL market because it lets the airlines run more frequent, smaller planes with a wider variety of schedules. That's why DL uses exclusively 763/764 aircraft on all flights to LHR. It lets them have non-stops from every hub, and multiple flights with different schedules from places like JFK and ATL.

I'm sad to see the 757 being phased out in favor of the 737. 737s feel cramped to me, and I'll miss getting to turn left on boarding to take my seat up front in F. Because of the 2L door they also tended to have a better ratio of F to Y seats which meant easier upgrades than on the 737.

ETOPS?
DL?
TATL?
F to Y?

I miss the days when the abbreviations here were BGS, SPUI, RIRO, and other things I understood.

[PHLBOS]

ETOPS? (Extended range Twin (Engine) Operations) or (Engines Turn Off - Passengers Swim) 

DL? (2-letter airline code for Delta Airlines)

TATL? (Trans-Atlantic)

F to Y? (First/Business Class to Coach/Economy Class)

[SteveG1988]

I've flown on a 717-100 before. Was fun.

But yeah, it is amazing just how much boeing was able to modify the 737 to keep up with what was needed.

Airbus has yet to have a jet that was really capable of doing that, the A318-321 has kind of done it...but not to the same extent

[PHLBOS]

I've flown on a 717-100 before. Was fun.

Assuming that you mean the recently discontinued T-tailed plane (flown by AirTran, Hawaiian & now Delta); that would be the 717-200; the shorter -100 and longer -300 derivatives never made it into production. 

Tid Bit: The original 717-100 would up becoming the military KC-135.

But yeah, it is amazing just how much boeing was able to modify the 737 to keep up with what was needed.

Airbus has yet to have a jet that was really capable of doing that, the A318-321 has kind of done it...but not to the same extent

That's partly because Boeing got at least a 20-year leap on 737 production before the first A320 ever rolled out.  Airbus didn't even exist when Boeing launched its first 737-100 circa 1967.

[SteveG1988]

I was actually on a KC-135R when i was in the USAF, we got an "incentive flight" basically a loop to fill up some F16's over south dakota, then return to grand forks. Was fun.

I did get to fly on a 717-200 recently, Delta with an Air Tran tail #

[PHLBOS]

I did get to fly on a 717-200 recently, Delta with an Air Tran tail #

IIRC, all the AirTran 717s going to Delta will retain their original tail (registration) numbers.

[realjd]

I see 747 and A380 aircraft continuing to be used for niche markets like LAX-SYD and JFK-DXB with high volume but an infrequent schedule due to time zones. I see the 777, 787, A330, and A350 as the go-to widebody long haul jets for most routes.

Is the 737 ETOPS certified like the 757 is? I see a need for 737/757/767 sized aircraft in the TATL market because it lets the airlines run more frequent, smaller planes with a wider variety of schedules. That's why DL uses exclusively 763/764 aircraft on all flights to LHR. It lets them have non-stops from every hub, and multiple flights with different schedules from places like JFK and ATL.

I'm sad to see the 757 being phased out in favor of the 737. 737s feel cramped to me, and I'll miss getting to turn left on boarding to take my seat up front in F. Because of the 2L door they also tended to have a better ratio of F to Y seats which meant easier upgrades than on the 737.

ETOPS?
DL?
TATL?
F to Y?

I miss the days when the abbreviations here were BGS, SPUI, RIRO, and other things I understood.

This is off topic. I'm allowed to use non-road-related obscure acronyms here!

[PHLBOS]

I see 747 and A380 aircraft continuing to be used for niche markets like LAX-SYD and JFK-DXB with high volume but an infrequent schedule due to time zones. I see the 777, 787, A330, and A350 as the go-to widebody long haul jets for most routes.

Is the 737 ETOPS certified like the 757 is? I see a need for 737/757/767 sized aircraft in the TATL market because it lets the airlines run more frequent, smaller planes with a wider variety of schedules. That's why DL uses exclusively 763/764 aircraft on all flights to LHR. It lets them have non-stops from every hub, and multiple flights with different schedules from places like JFK and ATL.

I'm sad to see the 757 being phased out in favor of the 737. 737s feel cramped to me, and I'll miss getting to turn left on boarding to take my seat up front in F. Because of the 2L door they also tended to have a better ratio of F to Y seats which meant easier upgrades than on the 737.

ETOPS?
DL?
TATL?
F to Y?

I miss the days when the abbreviations here were BGS, SPUI, RIRO, and other things I understood.

This is off topic. I'm allowed to use non-road-related obscure acronyms here!

I already provided the acronym definitions in an earlier post (reposed below):

ETOPS? (Extended range Twin (Engine) Operations) or (Engines Turn Off - Passengers Swim)   

DL? (2-letter airline code for Delta Airlines)

TATL? (Trans-Atlantic)

F to Y? (First/Business Class to Coach/Economy Class)