[*]

seahawk wrote:

The 777 and 787s will still be the backbone of the EK fleet and they are the backbone for nearly any major airline. That tells you a lot of which design won the long haul war.

How do you get to that reasoning? As it is the EK fleet consists of 777-300/300ER and A380 only. The 40 787-10 order is not even firmed yet. 40 787-10 will hardly make them the back bone of Emirates fleet, but rather a auxiliary fleet.

You should also think about that the 102 A380 transport at least as many passengers as the current 151 777 at Emirates. The number of A380 at Emirates is growing and the numbers of 777 will keep the same or be slightly reduced over the next years.

So to make it very simple, the A380 is and will be for quite a while the backbone of Emirates fleet.

dtw2hyd wrote:

fsabo wrote:

....

EK says the A380 expierience vs the 777 is a very large part of what makes the A380 so attractive. ....

So, Why not operate the only A380s if that is the best plane which gives the best experience to the customer. While at it operate only 3 class A380s.

If customer experience is so important, first bring back those perks and stop nickel and diming.

As business class and Y class are the same on the 3 and 2 class frames, what is the point to your comment?

It makes me smile reading post over post on people arguing over if it is good or not a plane.
Obviously it is good.
If it wasn't good, it will be left to die - like MD11, A345/6, L1011.
But it is still in production, by the way not every carrier can afford such plane, but obviously EK can, and can afford the maintenance and the logistics and the staff.
Plus, EK offers very good fares on his flights. MXP- or FCO - JFK on an A380 costs less than AZ or AA on A332 (or B764).

dtw2hyd wrote:

To make a profit one has to first cover the cost.

The bulk of Dubai-India carried by Indian carriers, not EK.

Connection traffic fares are heavily discounted across all cabins.

The highest trip cost in the industry + Bloated workforce(World's top #3) + Heavily discounted ticket prices = Yuge profits ???

I think you need some help, where is the SD button.

I looked at your claims as it surprised me, so I looked at all the departures from DXB to India (BOM, CCJ, COK, MAA, ATQ, DEL, IXE, JAI, AMD, BLR, CCU, HYD, IXM) tomorrow, 18180 seats, of which 8246 are being carried by Indian carriers, and 9556 seats by EK (not including Fly Dubai). Indian carriers provided more frequency, however with lower number of seats per flight, the average number of seats per Indian carrier was 187. EK averages 415 seats per flight, which could be increased by changing the 77L flights to 77W.

By supplying more seats per flight, EK gains the benefit of scale, many of the direct operating costs related to passengers reduce when a larger aircraft is used (on a per seat basis), such as terminal charges, landing charges, airways charges.

zeke wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

To make a profit one has to first cover the cost.

The bulk of Dubai-India carried by Indian carriers, not EK.

Connection traffic fares are heavily discounted across all cabins.

The highest trip cost in the industry + Bloated workforce(World's top #3) + Heavily discounted ticket prices = Yuge profits ???

I think you need some help, where is the SD button.

I looked at your claims as it surprised me, so I looked at all the departures from DXB to India (BOM, CCJ, COK, MAA, ATQ, DEL, IXE, JAI, AMD, BLR, CCU, HYD, IXM) tomorrow, 18180 seats, of which 8246 are being carried by Indian carriers, and 9556 seats by EK (not including Fly Dubai). Indian carriers provided more frequency, however with lower number of seats per flight, the average number of seats per Indian carrier was 187. EK averages 415 seats per flight, which could be increased by changing the 77L flights to 77W.

By supplying more seats per flight, EK gains the benefit of scale, many of the direct operating costs related to passengers reduce when a larger aircraft is used (on a per seat basis), such as terminal charges, landing charges, airways charges.

Not to mentioned crew cost, particular those in the pointing end . . .

PW100 wrote:

zeke wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

To make a profit one has to first cover the cost.

The bulk of Dubai-India carried by Indian carriers, not EK.

Connection traffic fares are heavily discounted across all cabins.

The highest trip cost in the industry + Bloated workforce(World's top #3) + Heavily discounted ticket prices = Yuge profits ???

I think you need some help, where is the SD button.

I looked at your claims as it surprised me, so I looked at all the departures from DXB to India (BOM, CCJ, COK, MAA, ATQ, DEL, IXE, JAI, AMD, BLR, CCU, HYD, IXM) tomorrow, 18180 seats, of which 8246 are being carried by Indian carriers, and 9556 seats by EK (not including Fly Dubai). Indian carriers provided more frequency, however with lower number of seats per flight, the average number of seats per Indian carrier was 187. EK averages 415 seats per flight, which could be increased by changing the 77L flights to 77W.

By supplying more seats per flight, EK gains the benefit of scale, many of the direct operating costs related to passengers reduce when a larger aircraft is used (on a per seat basis), such as terminal charges, landing charges, airways charges.

Not to mentioned crew cost, particular those in the pointing end . . .

EK are saving plenty on crew cost because quite simply they are significantly short of crew, evidence of that is the block hours on my roster for May (published today) 113hrs which for “factoring” purposes is 98hrs in 28 days, therefore legal.
3 ULR flights, 2 EU flights and a short hop locally.
Let’s hope all you fanboys out there that rave about the 380 passenger experience have a well rested PIC.

Not sure why you think that was an A380 fanboy argument . . .

I don't see how the A380 is a function in those problems you describe. If at all, the smaller the plane the bigger those particular problems.

seahawk wrote:

The 777 and 787s will still be the backbone of the EK fleet and they are the backbone for nearly any major airline. That tells you a lot of which design won the long haul war.

" backbone of the EK fleet "

Quite obviously so: 2/3rd of transport capacity is provided by the A380.
SCNR.

How can you guys finds so much to talk about on these A380 threads? Isn't it just the same bickering over and over again? I don't get how every A380 thread goes on for multiple pages.

gatibosgru wrote:

How can you guys finds so much to talk about on these A380 threads? Isn't it just the same bickering over and over again? I don't get how every A380 thread goes on for multiple pages.

Especially since this one is not a result of any news, it's just TC saying yet again that he thinks A380s are wonderful.

And Airbus thinks STC is wonderful. What a love fest.

NTLDaz wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

Kashmon wrote:

not sure about that
not many people in Aus/NZ would book EK if it were not for the A380's...
SQ/CX would have been march larger if EK did not have A380's

and you do not think the drastic reduction of fares by EK has anything to do with it?

EK are rarely if ever the cheap option from Australia. They are seen as a premium carrier so you pay a premium.

I just looked up a random date in July SYD - LHR and SQ, CX, TG,MH, CA, EH, BA are all cheaper in Y and C. Emirates success in Australia is not based on being cheap.

To pick up on that - for routes that I fly Emirates were only ever cheap in the very beginning of their expansion... *before* they had the A380 fleet.

I have flown them just one time - on a 777 - about fifteen years ago. Much as I prefer the A380, it's never been a good deal to fly one with Emirates since they have them. I've flown A380 cheaply on Lufthansa and Malaysia - otherwise it's always been 777... and not on Emirates.