|
Post by FabienA380 on Dec 28, 2016 17:13:55 GMT 1
a380.boards.net/post/85905/thread It's about deciding for yourself, whether by deferring, you lose less now than later rather than breaking even now and losing big later when production is slowed even more. I do believe they are more than happy with the later deliveries since it gives them more realistic chance to come with the "advance" engine neo. The longer the production goes the bigger the chance. Once the production stops or goes under some unrealistically small number to start once more is extremely problematic and expensive. They might get less next year or two but the total benefit is positive for sure. It's about deciding for yourself, whether by deferring, you lose less now than later rather than breaking even now and losing big later when production is slowed even more. Reportedly Airbus believe it can be delivering 30 A380s a year again in the 2030's, but how many will be delivered until then?.. With the current orders, I agree it'd be better and smoother to Airbus to defer as much as they can, to at least go down to a minimum pace where the line can still be running......
|
|
|
Post by FabienA380 on Dec 28, 2016 17:16:04 GMT 1
Leading to this I thought we could open a new thread,
what could be a minimum number of frames produced a year where the line would still be interesting to be run by Airbus?....
Minimum numbers would incur huge losses to Airbus though, but this only temporarily and bridging to a hypothetical A380neo or hopeful new orders later on?..............
|
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,957
|
Post by s543 on Dec 28, 2016 18:46:05 GMT 1
I do believe it is pretty complex question - there is more things to look at... - the people - They do have some skill and experience needed - if you put them to other use you need them there up to that the experience evaporates.... - the space and all the RIGs needed - it has to be stored somewhere and brought back and the people need to know without too much effort what to do.... all that costs a lot of money - if the line throughput is low you still need all the RIGs so they do occupy the valuable space without being really used - the subcontractors - similar goes there - you need to consider their operation as well.... their performance is part of the overall success I do believe that something like 1/month is sustainable minimum - what BO has - 0.5/month is just ridiculous - it is prestige only - to be able to produce those AirForce ONEs. I am very sure the economy stinks horribly and they just want to compensate all the costs on the mentioned AF1s - as was actually stated quite clearly by Mr.Trump The numbers he stated are out of the roof - if true ?
|
|
mjoelnir
in service - 2 years
Posts: 4,089
|
Post by mjoelnir on Dec 28, 2016 19:13:45 GMT 1
Airbus will need the body join tool. But it will be possible to go from 3 FAL stage 1 and 2, together 6 to 1 FAL stage hanger each, reducing 7 bays to three. I do not think it will be to difficult to shuffle the personal to the A330 and expanding A350 lines. The paint hangers in XFW can do A350, 330 and 320 instead and the outfitting hangars can be reduced from 8 to two. I think some A380 hangers in XFW are moved to house the fourth A320 series FAL anyway.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Dec 28, 2016 19:38:46 GMT 1
I think the answer to the question in this thread depends on Airbus' plans for the future.
If Airbus has decided to stop production when the order book is fully depleted, then production should continue at the fastest pace consistent with customer delivery schedules.
If Airbus is determined to launch an A380neo, then it should be ready to keep the line running even at a very low rate.
There is however a third case : Airbus may still be in negotiations with RR and EK about the timeline of a possible-but-still-uncertain A380neo, and I am afraid this may be the situation now. In this case, Airbus cannot accept to pile up large losses. I doubt they would accept to produce the A388 at a slower pace than 1 per month before a decision to launch a new sub-type is made.
|
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,957
|
Post by s543 on Dec 29, 2016 13:04:42 GMT 1
If Airbus has decided to stop production when the order book is fully depleted, then production should continue at the fastest pace consistent with customer delivery schedules. If Airbus is determined to launch an A380neo, then it should be ready to keep the line running even at a very low rate. There is however a third case : Airbus may still be in negotiations with RR and EK about the timeline of a possible-but-still-uncertain A380neo, and I am afraid this may be the situation now. In this case, Airbus cannot accept to pile up large losses. I doubt they would accept to produce the A388 at a slower pace than 1 per month before a decision to launch a new sub-type is made. Here we do agree (... ...) basically I do believe that it is once more - more complex. AB estimates that the transportation grows by some speedrate - provided no disaster similar to SEP11 happens. The airports are getting more and more congested and there is significant amount of routes where we have literally dozens of flights a day so ..... It seems that today there is still place for more flights with smaller planes but AB believes this capacity will get depleted and the time for larger planes will come and they believe it is not too far in the future. Look at some 2 hour flight routes in China - there are dozens of WBs there, look at LHR-JFK, CDG-JFK - it is ridiculous, there are 767s there !! + a couple of A380 flights. You have 7x 777 (!!!) within one hour leaving JFK to LHR. So there is no doubt space for more A380s on the globe - the question is when will this come and again the question of economy. There is "real" cost - like fuel, personell... but it is also airport, ATC etc. costs and those are mostly synthetic. Why should ATC cost more for a big plane than for a smaller one ? etc... So we (and AB) will see what will happen in the future....... and of course there is that you did describe.... but I am afraid that all three parties ie AB+RR x EK are observing the development I did describe and I am sure all parties do spend money on prediction of those factors.
|
|
someone
in service - 1 year
Posts: 3,218
|
Post by someone on Jan 11, 2017 10:23:57 GMT 1
Airbus/Bregier doesn't seems to be too worried with a 12/year production
|
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,957
|
Post by s543 on Jan 11, 2017 11:38:38 GMT 1
Airbus/Bregier doesn't seems to be too worried with a 12/year production I do believe they will have some loss on the A380 production, but they are not too concerned about it and it is worth it for the "image"
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Jan 11, 2017 13:44:26 GMT 1
Airbus/Bregier doesn't seems to be too worried with a 12/year production I am sure they are more worried than they want to show - not with the losses, with the future of the type.
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Jan 11, 2017 16:26:33 GMT 1
|
|