Revealed! Us Airways New Rj?

[EyeInTheSky]

Airbus says in A380 talks with U.S. carrier
Reuters, 05.07.04, 4:03 AM ET

PARIS, May 7 (Reuters) - European planemaker Airbus <EAD.PA> <BA.L> is in discussions with a U.S. airline about buying its superjumbo A380 jet, the company's chief executive Noel Forgeard said on Friday.

He also said he was very confident that at least one Japanese airline would operate the A380 and said Airbus was in talks with four new Asian carriers on the plane, including one in China.

Airbus has obtained orders for the A380 from European, Middle Eastern and Asian airlines, but no U.S. passenger carrier has ordered one.

Asked by CNBC television whether he was negotiating with a U.S. airline on an A380 deal, Forgeard answered; "Yes, but I am sorry I cannot disclose."

"We are discussing, yes indeed," he added.

He said Japanese airlines would eventually face pressure to operate A380s at Narita airport because foreign airlines running the plane would be benefiting from its efficiencies.

"I am very confident in the fact that at least one major Japanese carrier will operate the A380," Forgeard said.

 

[ITRADE]

Before an A380 can touch US soil, every airport that behemouth touches is going to need significant gate, taxiway, and runway upgrades.

 

[<./']>]

Supposedly, it will not require any major changes to large airports. The weight distribution on the wheels is the same as any large wide body existing today.

Here's a new regional jet at USAirways circa 2007.......

 

[ITRADE]

[quote name='<' date='./'']>,May 7 2004, 09:48 AM] Supposedly, it will not require any major changes to large airports. The weight distribution on the wheels is the same as any large wide body existing today.[/quote]
That runs contrary to everything that has been written in Aviation Week and other industry pubs.

 

[ClueByFour]

I thought it was a wingspan issue, not a weight distribution issue that was going to cause it problems in the US....

 

[ITRADE]

From Aviation Week: (Mar 4, 2002 )


GAO, Airbus Clash Over A380 Upgrade Costs For Airports
By Stephen Trimble/AviationNow.com
March 4, 2002

"Airbus and the General Accounting Office (GAO) are locked in a $1.6 billion disagreement over the estimated costs of preparing the first 14 U.S. airports for the A380. "

"A GAO report released Monday projects that 14 airports likely to service Airbus superjumbo jet by 2010 must pay nearly $2.1 billion to upgrade infrastructure, such as runways, taxiways and terminals. "

"Indeed, GAO acknowledged most airports plan to apply for modifications to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration's design standards in order to accept A380s."

"But some standards aren't negotiable, GAO said, citing, as an example, maximum weights for taxiway bridges."

 

[ITRADE]

Additionally, I know for a fact that many airports are having to do research into the ability to have jet bridges that couple up to each deck of the aircraft.

 

[Todd B]

A380 Airport Compatibility

 

[ITRADE]

Vindicated by the moderator. Haw haw.

:groovy: :groovy:

 

[SVQLBA]

From Aviation Week: (Mar 4, 2002 )


GAO, Airbus Clash Over A380 Upgrade Costs For Airports
By Stephen Trimble/AviationNow.com
March 4, 2002

"Airbus and the General Accounting Office (GAO) are locked in a $1.6 billion disagreement over the estimated costs of preparing the first 14 U.S. airports for the A380. "

"A GAO report released Monday projects that 14 airports likely to service Airbus superjumbo jet by 2010 must pay nearly $2.1 billion to upgrade infrastructure, such as runways, taxiways and terminals. "

"Indeed, GAO acknowledged most airports plan to apply for modifications to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration's design standards in order to accept A380s."

"But some standards aren't negotiable, GAO said, citing, as an example, maximum weights for taxiway bridges."

There's a more recent AvWeek report (last week I think). Weight-loading on pavement is less than the 777-300 so that isn't an issue, nor is wing-span (again, less than a 777). The wheel track is quite wide, so wider shoulders, taxi-way filets may be needed. Airbus kept the A380 within a dimensional "box" to minimize size-related problems.

The main issue seems to be pax processing at terminals. CDG is building some two-level, three-bridge gates (looks cool in the AvWeek artist impression). Plus, 500 people waiting for bags probably requires longer bag carousels (min 100ft from memory) to avoid that being a zoo. You also need bigger waiting areas at the gates for all the pax. Not a show stopper, but something airports/airlines probably want to address to keep pax happy.

I think JFK is already committed (may have already made) some A380 friendly gates. A lot of discussion on this is mis-informed and basically Airbus-bashing. If an airport is handling 747s, it's not going to be a major deal to handle A380s. Their may be some pax comfort issues, but almost all US terminals are undersized for the pax flows these days, whether you are talking 737s or A380s. Look at ORD most of the day -- it's a zoo.

 

[Reservation Agent]

You can bet it isn't USAIRWAYS... probably Mr Branson of Virgin Atlantic..

 

[ITRADE]

There's a more recent AvWeek report (last week I think). Weight-loading on pavement is less than the 777-300 so that isn't an issue, nor is wing-span (again, less than a 777). The wheel track is quite wide, so wider shoulders, taxi-way filets may be needed. Airbus kept the A380 within a dimensional "box" to minimize size-related problems.

But total weight of the A380 is at least 25% heavier than the 747-400ER. So, the weight issue is going to be a factor on taxi bridges (i.e. at LAX and ORD).

Plus, 500 people waiting for bags probably requires longer bag carousels (min 100ft from memory) to avoid that being a zoo. You also need bigger waiting areas at the gates for all the pax. Not a show stopper, but something airports/airlines probably want to address to keep pax happy.

Unless the facilities are ready, the airlines are not going to want to do it. Why pi$$ off the passengers and make then take a competing carrier?

I think JFK is already committed (may have already made) some A380 friendly gates. A lot of discussion on this is mis-informed and basically Airbus-bashing.

I've got zero vested interest in this. I prefer the A320 to the 737s, so there.

Their may be some pax comfort issues, but almost all US terminals are undersized for the pax flows these days, whether you are talking 737s or A380s. Look at ORD most of the day -- it's a zoo.

Heaping an additional 200 passengers into the Customs queue and checkin counters is not going to help matters.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

You can bet it isn't USAIRWAYS... probably Mr Branson of Virgin Atlantic..

It's probably UPS or FedEx that's looking at these planes. They don't have the same issues as a passenger carrier.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

<,./']> there are a lot of 747-SPs in the desert.

 

[dfw79]

It's probably UPS or FedEx that's looking at these planes. They don't have the same issues as a passenger carrier.

FedEx has already ordered the 380-800F...so it isn't them.