UPS has been reported to have cancelled their A380 order.
http://tinyurl.com/2376m8
UPS reportedly cancelling A380 order
Moderator: Latest news team
UPS reportedly cancelling A380 order
There are no strangers in the world, just friends we have yet to meet.
Re: UPS reportedly cancelling A380 order
UPS Denies Canceling Airbus Order
We continue to talk to Airbus. We haven't changed our order and we haven't made a decision one way or the other, so the order still stands," said Lynnette McIntire, a spokeswoman for UPS in Atlanta.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/01/ ... 43375.html
somewhere amongst all this lays the truth, but this article is of interest.
http://www.abcmoney.co.uk/news/1920078556.htm
this excerpt from that article is of interest to financial regulators if its in fact true??
http://www.abcmoney.co.uk/news/1920078556.htm
this excerpt from that article is of interest to financial regulators if its in fact true??
Les Echos said UPS decided some time ago to cancel its order but Airbus asked it to delay the announcement in order to protect a runway extension project in Hamburg, necessary for the future development of the A380-cargo.
There are no strangers in the world, just friends we have yet to meet.
CX is right, selling planes is important, but when it comes to the A380F Airbus at the moment could benefit by putting the A380F program on ice for a few years and concentrate on the A380 Pax. This year will be very important for the A380 program in my opinion. So if UPS cancels the A380F order, this isn't terrible news for Airbus.smacDC-10 wrote:Well, I guess selling planes isn't important then? Give me a break.CX wrote:Either way it isn't bad news for airbus..
When your one of the cornerstones of your rational for coming out with the A380is based on the cargo version, then the fact that you now have zero freighter orders, is a huge deal.CX wrote:Either way it isn't bad news for airbus..
That’s not just sales, a lot of the design of the beast went into ensuring it had built in freighter capability. That’s all wasted.
Ill be generous and allow that Airbus has to only sell 450 of the A380s to break even. With the freighters, you could count on the options along with the firm orders. Go ahead an argue, but if there was a business case of buying the beast for cargo in the first place, the cargo growth means the options will be exercised .
At this point, Airbus has picked up (15 new orders?) for the pax A380, and lost 40 on the freighters (Emirates converted and did ILFC). That’s another way to say, we can put off a decision until we know more, i.e. cancel entirely if need be.
Virgin is waiting to see if the thing works, you will never see an A380 freighter. Net loss at least 35 orders at this point.
Yea it’s a bid deal, the longer it takes to make your 450 (and I doubt they ever will) the more it takes to break even, which means that it goes up at a higher rate than your production, you never catch up. At some point you have to cancel production.
Pretty obvious at this point it’s a financial disaster for Airbus no matter how they spin it, and it will drag on them for as long as it keeps going on the A380.
Once it production is rolling, supposedly 4 a month, that’s 4 years, and then what? Down to 1 a month, half a one a month, at some point the economics do not work. Stay tuned, but yes, this is a huge disaster for Airbus.
Its only saving grace would have been if the 747 went out of production and the A380 was the only option, and that’s not happening for another 15-20 years.
I would say: either way it is VERY BAD news for airbus, either they will either loose the A380F or they will have to give huge discounts to UPS, so Airbus will loose money anyway...CX wrote:Either way it isn't bad news for airbus..
By the way, why is the A380F delayed by a problem in pax entertainement wiring???
RC20 wrote: When your one of the cornerstones of your rational for coming out with the A380is based on the cargo version, then the fact that you now have zero freighter orders, is a huge deal.
That’s not just sales, a lot of the design of the beast went into ensuring it had built in freighter capability. That’s all wasted.
CX didn't say that it wasn't a big deal, all he said was that it wasn't bad news, and it isn't. As I said already, Airbus could benefit by putting the A380F on ice for a few years to concentrate on the A380 pax plane which is having some difficulties. A few years from now, Airbus will know what potential problems the A380F will face, and be prepared to handle them when it arises, which will not cause delays on the Freighter as the unexpected problems on the pax program arised. Since the A380F will provide more capacity than any existing freighter plane in the existing market, Airbus is at an advantage waiting a few years before beginning to build this plane, and more importantly, it will be ready for any potential problems.
UPS believed that there was a business case for buying the freighter, so did FedEx. When all the delays are taken care of, it wouldn't surprise me to see UPS double its order, or FedEx, as I have said here before, reorder the plane. Time will tell, but being anti-A380 is not a business argument.Ill be generous and allow that Airbus has to only sell 450 of the A380s to break even. With the freighters, you could count on the options along with the firm orders. Go ahead an argue, but if there was a business case of buying the beast for cargo in the first place, the cargo growth means the options will be exercised .
And that is a legitimate business decision to be made by those companies regarding a program that is facing delays. Now that Airbus has worked out the problems with the A380, the question will not be whether UPS will cancel, but how many customers could the A380F get once the A380 pax enter service, and customers see how the performance of the plane will be. If the A380 performs as Airbus claims it will be, the A380F program will get backing by freighter carriers.At this point, Airbus has picked up (15 new orders?) for the pax A380, and lost 40 on the freighters (Emirates converted and did ILFC). That’s another way to say, we can put off a decision until we know more, i.e. cancel entirely if need be.
Virgin is waiting to see if the thing works, you will never see an A380 freighter. Net loss at least 35 orders at this point.
Yeah, lets see if we will never see an A380F, I love the way you can see into the future.
Well, lets see if that will be the case in the next couple of months after the A380 enters service. Amazing how you sound like those that said the same thing about the 747 when it was about to enter service.Yea it’s a bid deal, the longer it takes to make your 450 (and I doubt they ever will) the more it takes to break even, which means that it goes up at a higher rate than your production, you never catch up. At some point you have to cancel production.
Now doubt Airbus has lost money in the short term, but the long term prospects of the A380 is what will really decide whether the A380 program has been a disaster. After all, Boeing almost went bankrupt because of the 747 program, yet that great plane is still there and so is the company.Pretty obvious at this point it’s a financial disaster for Airbus no matter how they spin it, and it will drag on them for as long as it keeps going on the A380.
Lets see if it will be 4 a month out of the factory.Once it production is rolling, supposedly 4 a month, that’s 4 years, and then what? Down to 1 a month, half a one a month, at some point the economics do not work. Stay tuned, but yes, this is a huge disaster for Airbus.
Its only saving grace would have been if the 747 went out of production and the A380 was the only option, and that’s not happening for another 15-20 years.
The 747 serves a completely different market than the A380, so lets not compare apples and oranges. The real possibility is there that the A380 could eclipse the 747, something that will most likely bother you when it happens, but since the planes are not competitors, it would be really absurd to compare these two airplanes.
A long time ago I already said on this forum that I didn't believe in the A380 at all, a lot told me I was wrong.
Very slowly it looks to me that my conclusion was the correct one.
If I was Airbus I would stop the A380 project and would concentrate on the very succesful A318, 319 and 32* and the A33*/A34* and possibly the A350.
But hey who am I?
If they continue like this the company will get into a financial dissaster.
Greetz,
Erwin
Very slowly it looks to me that my conclusion was the correct one.
If I was Airbus I would stop the A380 project and would concentrate on the very succesful A318, 319 and 32* and the A33*/A34* and possibly the A350.
But hey who am I?
If they continue like this the company will get into a financial dissaster.
Greetz,
Erwin
A Whole Different Animal
-
smokejumper
- Posts: 1033
- Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:00
- Location: Northern Virginia USA
Some thoughts on issues facing any freighter:
Freight loads are generally heavier than passenger loads, so the fuel fraction of the total gross weight must be lower. This why freighters have lesser ranges than their passenger plane relatives; they carr less fuel.
The floor must be re-inforced to handle inreased floor loads (freight is generally heavier and more dense than passengers). This adds to the airframe structural weight. The work required to design and build a freighter version of a passenger plane must be recouped from sales (no great thought here!).
It is a little easier to load freight straight in (through either the nose or tail) than to slide pallets in from the side and then change direction to go aft - not a big effort, but this adds some time to the loading process.
Boeing's 747F (with the cockpit above the passenger/cargo deck) has a swing-up nose, while the A-380 can not due to the cockpit being placed between the two decks. Hence, A380F loading will take slightly more time and, outsized cargo can not be accomodated since it can not be slid straight in. Airbus may be able to develop a swing open tail that would allow straight in loading, but this is expensive.
I do not know the market size for a freighter A380, but it is limited to standard pallet or container sized loads. Let's see where this all winds up!
Freight loads are generally heavier than passenger loads, so the fuel fraction of the total gross weight must be lower. This why freighters have lesser ranges than their passenger plane relatives; they carr less fuel.
The floor must be re-inforced to handle inreased floor loads (freight is generally heavier and more dense than passengers). This adds to the airframe structural weight. The work required to design and build a freighter version of a passenger plane must be recouped from sales (no great thought here!).
It is a little easier to load freight straight in (through either the nose or tail) than to slide pallets in from the side and then change direction to go aft - not a big effort, but this adds some time to the loading process.
Boeing's 747F (with the cockpit above the passenger/cargo deck) has a swing-up nose, while the A-380 can not due to the cockpit being placed between the two decks. Hence, A380F loading will take slightly more time and, outsized cargo can not be accomodated since it can not be slid straight in. Airbus may be able to develop a swing open tail that would allow straight in loading, but this is expensive.
I do not know the market size for a freighter A380, but it is limited to standard pallet or container sized loads. Let's see where this all winds up!
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... paper.html
I mean they had just 20 A380Fs on order, and it isn't even ready and further delays will cost Airbus compensation money anyway... If they slow the A380F programme, as said in the article, they will get on quicker with the -800R and the -900, which is good or bad? And another thing for sure is, slowing the A380F will surely free more engineers to make sure the A380-800 is on track.. and then who knows, then A380F today isn't a very competitive plane against the 748F, few years later they might come up with an improved A380F..
Of course it is a disaster that a new plane has no orders and is forced to be halted, but for the A380 programme as a whole, i don't think it will turn out too negatively. What I think Airbus might do to UPS is to let them defer the order, then at least they still have a customer for the plane...
I mean they had just 20 A380Fs on order, and it isn't even ready and further delays will cost Airbus compensation money anyway... If they slow the A380F programme, as said in the article, they will get on quicker with the -800R and the -900, which is good or bad? And another thing for sure is, slowing the A380F will surely free more engineers to make sure the A380-800 is on track.. and then who knows, then A380F today isn't a very competitive plane against the 748F, few years later they might come up with an improved A380F..
Of course it is a disaster that a new plane has no orders and is forced to be halted, but for the A380 programme as a whole, i don't think it will turn out too negatively. What I think Airbus might do to UPS is to let them defer the order, then at least they still have a customer for the plane...
A380F cancellation
It seems Airbus is playing games with cancellation announcements for the A380F from UPS, just like they did with the cancellation of the 37 A300's in 2005.
There is no way to spin this as a positive. The A380F is moving into deep freeze.
But they are doing great with the A330F, with Guggenheim ordering some noew also.
There is no way to spin this as a positive. The A380F is moving into deep freeze.
But they are doing great with the A330F, with Guggenheim ordering some noew also.
The UPS 380F programme isnt all that behind schedule, so my guess is they will take them, unless their original business case has fallen over.
Remember the 380F is the backbone of the stretch pax version so eagerly awaited by Emirates.
Personally, if it gets put on hold, I think AB should do a "Beluga" on the front end to give straight in loading.
Cheers
Achace
Remember the 380F is the backbone of the stretch pax version so eagerly awaited by Emirates.
Personally, if it gets put on hold, I think AB should do a "Beluga" on the front end to give straight in loading.
Cheers
Achace
"This is a decision, it's final"
"The announcement appeared to catch Airbus by surprise"
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/02/ ... sclark.php
"The announcement appeared to catch Airbus by surprise"
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/02/ ... sclark.php
-
smokejumper
- Posts: 1033
- Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:00
- Location: Northern Virginia USA
I’d like to add a few thoughts regarding the A380 and A380F situation.
1. Much of the design of the A380F (increased structural capabilities, etc.) is required for a lengthened (850 passenger) plane. I do not know how far Airbus has traveled down the design road on the A380F, but suspending work on it certainly impacts the prospects for the larger aircraft.
2. Airbus has a wing design facility in Wichita (Kansas – in the Old Town section of the city) that was focused on wing design. I visited the offices a year ago and was told that they were doing a lot of the work on the freighter and its wing. I wonder whether the excellent capability of this facility will be lost.
3. We really do not know what the real break-even point is; in fact, Airbus does not know either. Airbus says it is 450 units, but given the competitive situation, steep discounts are being offered by both manufacturers, so future revenues are impossible to estimate, even for the companies. I hope Airbus does not turn to "Enron" style accounting! Costs are another area of concern: costs continue to rise and some expensive rework (gutting and then re-installing the wire bundles, etc.) will be required. Since both revenues and costs can not be accurately judged, I do not feel confident that the true break-even is 450 planes; it is probably much higher.
4. Airbus is now facing a Hobson’s Choice situation. If they continue with the A380 program, losses will continue and these losses will be borne by shareholders and by the affected governments. Certainly, the customer airlines will not be willing to pay more. If Airbus decides to end the pain and cut their losses by canceling the project, the company’s reputation and credibility will suffer greatly and future sales of any new plane will suffer – this could be fatal. So what is Airbus to do? Perhaps the best (and probably only) choice is to continue the project and deliver as many as they can and lick their wounds.
1. Much of the design of the A380F (increased structural capabilities, etc.) is required for a lengthened (850 passenger) plane. I do not know how far Airbus has traveled down the design road on the A380F, but suspending work on it certainly impacts the prospects for the larger aircraft.
2. Airbus has a wing design facility in Wichita (Kansas – in the Old Town section of the city) that was focused on wing design. I visited the offices a year ago and was told that they were doing a lot of the work on the freighter and its wing. I wonder whether the excellent capability of this facility will be lost.
3. We really do not know what the real break-even point is; in fact, Airbus does not know either. Airbus says it is 450 units, but given the competitive situation, steep discounts are being offered by both manufacturers, so future revenues are impossible to estimate, even for the companies. I hope Airbus does not turn to "Enron" style accounting! Costs are another area of concern: costs continue to rise and some expensive rework (gutting and then re-installing the wire bundles, etc.) will be required. Since both revenues and costs can not be accurately judged, I do not feel confident that the true break-even is 450 planes; it is probably much higher.
4. Airbus is now facing a Hobson’s Choice situation. If they continue with the A380 program, losses will continue and these losses will be borne by shareholders and by the affected governments. Certainly, the customer airlines will not be willing to pay more. If Airbus decides to end the pain and cut their losses by canceling the project, the company’s reputation and credibility will suffer greatly and future sales of any new plane will suffer – this could be fatal. So what is Airbus to do? Perhaps the best (and probably only) choice is to continue the project and deliver as many as they can and lick their wounds.