Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 11-24-2020, 07:02 AM   #701
Bigtime
Franchise Player
 
Bigtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Very interesting read, an interview with former Airbus salesman John Leahy on the shortcomings of the A380 and his belief that had the nextgen engines been on it things may have been different:

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/...-a380-failure/

Quote:
Where I believe we got into serious trouble was when we were blindsided by the engine manufacturers. They were assuring us that the specific fuel consumption was that of new generation engines, and it would be ten years before there was the next leap to a substantial improvement. We launched in 2000, but three years later we got the 787 being launched with GENx engines and Rolls Royce matching that, having a ten to 12 percent better specific fuel consumption than the A380’s engines. Can you imagine the success of the A380 if it had 12 percent better fuel burn than it actually had?
Bigtime is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bigtime For This Useful Post:
Old 11-24-2020, 07:23 AM   #702
Maritime Q-Scout
Ben
 
Maritime Q-Scout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: God's Country (aka Cape Breton Island)
Exp:
Default

I always looked at the 787 vs A380 as betting on different things.

Airbus bet that the industry would continue as it had since the birth of the jet age. A spoke and hub model. Passengers do the short hop from Boston, Washington, Hartford, Charlotte, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, etc to New York. Then from New York hop on an A380 and skip across the pond to London.

Boeing put their money on the industry changing and passengers opting for direct routes on smaller aircraft. Thus eliminating the hop to New York and simply flying the smaller jet from Boston, Washington, Hartford, Charlotte, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, etc direct to London.

Would the smaller jets make up for the increased gate fees, bigger fleets, more staff, and increased overall fuel burn?

Turns out yes. The industry went long and thin routes as opposed to hub and spoke. The market chose the 787 over the A380 (which also needed airports to retrofit themselves for it).

I haven't flown on one (probably never will) but I loved the A380.

I am surprised that it never caught on in India or China where I would think domestically it would fair quite well. Perhaps India doesn't have the middle class to support air travel on a large scale, and China's rail system might be enough to discourage the A380 (I don't know).

Regardless, I don't think more efficient engines would have done the trick.

Sure they'd be profitable at a lower capacity, but that's not how airlines operate. Airlines like to run at max capacity, and tend to put planes that fill moreso than larger planes that don't even if the operation matrix is there. Better off filling a 787 than having 80-90 seats (or whatever) empty. Flying an empty plane doesn't instill confidence (kind of like how no one likes to eat in an empty restaurant).

The versatility of the 787 vs A380 is really the killer, not the engines. The 787 can fly into YHZ, YEG, YWG, YQB, YQM, etc whereas the A380 can only fly into YYZ, YUL and YVR... can YYC handle it?

It was just too big. It's like saying Houston to San Diego would get more Post-Panamax ships on that route if the ships had more efficient engines. Well... no, that's not really the problem there. Demand and inability to cross the Canal are bigger issues than engine efficiency.
__________________

"Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
Maritime Q-Scout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2020, 07:35 AM   #703
Bigtime
Franchise Player
 
Bigtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Good reply to my RT of that article from an airline network planner at AA:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1331239114440663044
Bigtime is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bigtime For This Useful Post:
Old 11-24-2020, 07:36 AM   #704
Bigtime
Franchise Player
 
Bigtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout View Post
The versatility of the 787 vs A380 is really the killer, not the engines. The 787 can fly into YHZ, YEG, YWG, YQB, YQM, etc whereas the A380 can only fly into YYZ, YUL and YVR... can YYC handle it?
Yes, YYC can accommodate the A380 (I believe some taxiways and ramp space may get restricted while it is around).

Last edited by Bigtime; 11-24-2020 at 07:48 AM.
Bigtime is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bigtime For This Useful Post:
Old 11-24-2020, 08:03 AM   #705
Ryan Coke
#1 Goaltender
 
Ryan Coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Exp:
Default

YYC has the longest runway in Canada.

And Bigtime, I see that was Brian Znotins, I liked him, smart guy. He was a guy we were generally sad to see leave.
Ryan Coke is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ryan Coke For This Useful Post:
Old 11-24-2020, 08:06 AM   #706
Bigtime
Franchise Player
 
Bigtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Yeah, I didn't realize he had left WS.
Bigtime is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bigtime For This Useful Post:
Old 11-24-2020, 08:15 AM   #707
Maritime Q-Scout
Ben
 
Maritime Q-Scout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: God's Country (aka Cape Breton Island)
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan Coke View Post
YYC has the longest runway in Canada.

And Bigtime, I see that was Brian Znotins, I liked him, smart guy. He was a guy we were generally sad to see leave.
I didn't know that YYC had the longest runway in Canada, cool!



I was more referencing the terminal building and facilities as opposed to runway length. My little airport YQY can land a 747, but as I know you'd be aware, no way in hell can YQY accommodate a 747
__________________

"Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
Maritime Q-Scout is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Maritime Q-Scout For This Useful Post:
Old 11-24-2020, 08:16 AM   #708
Bigtime
Franchise Player
 
Bigtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

I believe there is one gate at the new terminal that was designed to handle the A380, it doesn't have the upper deck gate, but could have been retrofitted to have it I believe. I bet someone here like Acey knows all the details on that.
Bigtime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2020, 06:47 PM   #709
Acey
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

New YYC terminal was designed with A380 in mind and opened as such - 2 gates are built for it, 74 and 78. One bridge goes to the lower deck and one goes to the upper deck. In an Operation Yellow Ribbon (9/11) type of scenario you could stick one on gate 76 as well and just restrict the wingspan of whatever's on gate 73. You'd have no upper deck bridge in that scenario.

An A380 would be unrestricted in its travels from either gate 74 or 78 to the new runway on the east side. There are some restrictions on the west side of the field but other jets are already subject to those.

British Airways purchased an A380 towbar for Calgary, and a ground handling company here has a tractor capable of pushing one - they use it for Cargolux and Korean Air.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout View Post
the A380 can only fly into YYZ, YUL and YVR... can YYC handle it?
YEG can also handle the A380 at one gate (coincidentally, gate 80) but there would be no upper deck bridge. YEG has had, if I remember correctly, a total of 6 A380 diversions while Calgary has never seen one. A380 flight paths tend to positionally favour YEG, and the diversions have not required a full deplaning of the aircraft. If everybody has to get off that's when we'll see one, assuming the plane can get here... because we have upper deck bridges and YEG doesn't. None of YEG's A380 diversions have parked at the terminal.

Last edited by Acey; 11-24-2020 at 06:58 PM.
Acey is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
Old 11-27-2020, 07:12 AM   #710
Bigtime
Franchise Player
 
Bigtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Bye bye Pandas, Lufthansa Cargo picked them up this morning:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/...200Z/CYYC/EDDF
Bigtime is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bigtime For This Useful Post:
Old 11-27-2020, 08:45 AM   #711
Lubicon
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Exp:
Default

Singapore airlines has resumed SIN-JFK non stop on the A350. It blocks in at nearly 18 hours.

SIN-JFK routes over the Pacific and western/central arctic for its polar routing.
JFK-SIN returns over the Atlantic and through Russia. It essentially circumnavigates the earth going eastbound the entire time.


https://flightaware.com/live/flight/...825Z/WSSS/KJFK

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/...330Z/KJFK/WSSS
Lubicon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Lubicon For This Useful Post:
Old 11-30-2020, 02:12 PM   #712
rotten42
Powerplay Quarterback
 
rotten42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

saw this on Facebook today.7373 low runway pass at YYC



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Di1e...l=FrankDematos
rotten42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2020, 04:10 PM   #713
chummer
Franchise Player
 
chummer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rotten42 View Post
saw this on Facebook today.7373 low runway pass at YYC



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Di1e...l=FrankDematos
Fun fact....I was driving one of those fire trucks when we gave that 737 the water salute.
chummer is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to chummer For This Useful Post:
Old 11-30-2020, 07:17 PM   #714
burn_this_city
Franchise Player
 
burn_this_city's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

burn_this_city is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to burn_this_city For This Useful Post:
Old 11-30-2020, 07:35 PM   #715
Maritime Q-Scout
Ben
 
Maritime Q-Scout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: God's Country (aka Cape Breton Island)
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by burn_this_city View Post
I meant to post that the other day. When I saw the video was uploaded I thought "hrmmm, I wonder if Alex checks out Calgary Puck? What a coinsidence!"
__________________

"Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
Maritime Q-Scout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2020, 08:01 PM   #716
burn_this_city
Franchise Player
 
burn_this_city's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout View Post
I meant to post that the other day. When I saw the video was uploaded I thought "hrmmm, I wonder if Alex checks out Calgary Puck? What a coinsidence!"
It showed up in my Youtube recommends.
burn_this_city is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2020, 01:46 AM   #717
speede5
First Line Centre
 
speede5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Exp:
Default

Way back in the day I went through Namao in a tutor and that runway was so damn long, you could do two touch and go's and still make the final taxiway.

As for the 737-200 video, I've listened a few times and can't catch the last line in the video, what did AC say?
speede5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2020, 08:23 AM   #718
Ryan Coke
#1 Goaltender
 
Ryan Coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Exp:
Default

I think it was “Can I do that?”, referring to the fly by.
Ryan Coke is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ryan Coke For This Useful Post:
Old 01-05-2021, 08:53 AM   #719
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

Westjet sells it's 767's to Amazon:


https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/ama...861635?cmp=rss


It mentions Boeing 737-300s in the article, but I think that is erroneous, as the rest of the article discusses the 767's, and it would make sense for Westjet to unload them.
Fuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2021, 09:16 AM   #720
Bigtime
Franchise Player
 
Bigtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
Westjet sells it's 767's to Amazon:


https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/ama...861635?cmp=rss


It mentions Boeing 737-300s in the article, but I think that is erroneous, as the rest of the article discusses the 767's, and it would make sense for Westjet to unload them.
Wow, that only made our news here now? Happened a few months ago.
Bigtime is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:41 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021