모두
← Back to Squawk list
Oversize Expectations for the Airbus A380
Only one airline — Emirates — has made the plane a central element of its global strategy. (www.nytimes.com) 기타...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
I think Emirates have got it right - success in the airline business is not only about economics - it's also about customer satisfaction and differentiating yourself from the competition. Five of the top ten airlines as rated by Skytrax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skytrax#Best_Airline_Award) are flying or have ordered A-380s. There is not a single US Airline on the list.
You know...I'm wondering if the A-380 could take on the challenge of flying into "Kai Tak", with a major crosswind! Guess we'll never know. Would have been fun to watch!
There are enough videos out there of A380 crosswind landings- how do you think the aircraft got its certification?
I'm talking about "Kai Tak", the old Hong Kong airport. It would have been fun to watch the "Beast" take it on.
John Donaldson, can you name another international point-to-point since from a major city/hub (tokyo) to simply another city does not qualify. Point to point would be from a city that is not a hub!!!!!!!!!!
I guess it depends on your definition of hub and point to point. For example we have Air Berlin doing what Emirates does but into smaller markets like RSW to Dusseldorf bypassing MIA and FRA. Like the JAL example, DUS is the third busiest airport in Germany but nowhere near FRA and MUN that would be expected to support A-380 service RSW and MCO are not hubs but end markets.
Cancun and Orlando are end destinations and have flights to many secondary markets such as Manchester. In Canada, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa and Halifax airports bypass the big three markets. Many point to point flights are now in seasonal markets and they all rob the traditional hubs.
Cancun and Orlando are end destinations and have flights to many secondary markets such as Manchester. In Canada, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa and Halifax airports bypass the big three markets. Many point to point flights are now in seasonal markets and they all rob the traditional hubs.
John I would agree- Manchester, UK to Calgary, AB is more what I would consider point-to-point. However, there are all sorts of issues with this especially when it comes to the ultra long and thin. The first is curfew times. Matching a departure city's curfew times with that of an arrival city is extremely challenging even without ultra long flights leading to very nasty departure or arrival times with almost no time to turn the aircraft around often necessitating the aircraft lying idle. The flyer loses out on frequency. Next is issues like technical delays. The turn around time will in any case be challenging, but when you do point-to-point you don't have spare crews or aircraft to easily swap out like you do with hub operations. Ultra long haul also requires exponential increases in crew rest time and in the number of cabin crew and cockpit crew that you have on board. Crucially, you have to look at the shear number of aircraft you need to perform hub point to point "The H&S system serves network destinations with the fewest routes of any alternative design. For example, five destinations require only four routes with one hub and four spoke cities but ten routes are required if the same destinations are connected with a point-to-point system. Consequently, for any given level of frequency and number of destinations, the H&S system requires the fewest number of aircraft (Button, 2002b)." That's why the hub-and-spoke is here to stay.