Airbus to miss A380 delivery targets due to Trent 900

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/airbus-misses-a380-superjumbo-target-after-engine-failure-20101216-18ynq.html

Not surprising here, as the Trent 900 also hit a major snag
when Qantas found a major defect in one of the newer engines built to
replace the one that exploded on QFA32.

Also interesting to note that they will only missit by 1
delivery, with 22 waiting/nearly completed. The article doesn't go into
if those were going to receive the EA engines or if they were getting
the Trent 900, but did mention that out of all of the delays for the
ones that could have been delivered, payment and seats were the only
problems. Korean Air and China Southern are still slated to receive
their A380s in 2011, as well as additional ones to those already flying
it.

In addition, SIA indicated that they will replace the B744 used
on their SIA-NRT-LAX run with an A380, giving LAX a second visit by the
aircraft, and the only one currently, since QFA ordered their pilots to
not use the engine at full power, which is required if they were to
make it to LAX. Since that order, QFA dropped the A380 from that route,
pending the Trent 900 fixes.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email: ***@sbcglobal.net
Unix Systems Administrator, | ***@ozemail.com.au
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFNCw8VyBkZmuMZ8L8RAn1WAJ0aVan/0KrvvEVYpNZBd6/TrUhGfACg2+M0
/aSnT+spk3FNZwyuMD4nplA=
=utV5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.

[JF Mezei]

Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/airbus-misses-a380-superjumbo-target-after-engine-failure-20101216-18ynq.html

This is no surprise. It was quite evident that when Airbus was asked to
dismount new engines to be sent to Qantas/SG/LH, that there would be
some aiplanes that couldn't be delivered.

But if the number is just 1 unit off the target, this is pretty good
considering. It isn't as if anyone had bet the farm on Airbus meeting a
target.

Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
aircraft, and the only one currently, since QFA ordered their pilots to
not use the engine at full power, which is required if they were to
make it to LAX. Since that order, QFA dropped the A380 from that route,
pending the Trent 900 fixes.

I wonder how much pressure Qantas is putting on RollRoyce to prove that
the engine is now safe to operate at full thrust.

Could Qantas operate a 380 with less than 100% cargo/pax capacity and
thus require less fuel and less thrust to make the LAX run ? Could such
an operation be economically competitive to operating a 747-400 ?
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.

[matt weber]

On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 04:00:39 -0500, JF Mezei

Post by JF Mezei

Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/airbus-misses-a380-superjumbo-target-after-engine-failure-20101216-18ynq.html

This is no surprise. It was quite evident that when Airbus was asked to
dismount new engines to be sent to Qantas/SG/LH, that there would be
some aiplanes that couldn't be delivered.

One of the QF aircraft on the production line was found to have an
'unacceptable engine'...

Post by JF Mezei
But if the number is just 1 unit off the target, this is pretty good
considering. It isn't as if anyone had bet the farm on Airbus meeting a
target.

Perhaps, but you have to wonder how they managed to certify the engine
to 85,000 pounds. (The GP7277 is actually certified to about 81,500
pounds).

Post by JF Mezei

Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
aircraft, and the only one currently, since QFA ordered their pilots to
not use the engine at full power, which is required if they were to
make it to LAX. Since that order, QFA dropped the A380 from that route,
pending the Trent 900 fixes.

I wonder how much pressure Qantas is putting on RollRoyce to prove that
the engine is now safe to operate at full thrust.

If QF changes engine suppliers for the later A380 deliveries, we will
know that RR didn't prove it.

Post by JF Mezei
Could Qantas operate a 380 with less than 100% cargo/pax capacity and
thus require less fuel and less thrust to make the LAX run ? Could such
an operation be economically competitive to operating a 747-400 ?

With the current RR approved restrictions on Trent 972 thrust, my
thumbnail says pax capacity would drop to about 160 with zero freight
lift. That is roughly half the capacity of a QF 744, and a directing
operating cost that is probably close to two times that of a 744 on
the run. So the short answer to your question is QF would lose a
fortune operating a 160 seat A380 on the LAX-SYD run.

LAX-NRT is nowhere near as demanding as LAX-SYD is.
The 'spread' between Maximum Zero Fuel Weight (MZFW), and Maximum
Gross Take off Weight (MGTOW) is about 200,000kg (440,000 pounds).
That corresponds to about a 15 hour mission. LAX-NRT is unlikely to
exceed about 11 hours, so for the LAX-NRT mission the aircraft is
going to be at least 100,000 pounds under MGTOW.

QF is probably the only carrier to routinely operate the A380 at
MGTOW, which implies the engines are run longer and harder than at
other carriers.
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.