Covid-19; Impact on the aviation industry

WishUWereHere

Yet more turbulence in the Airline Industry:

https://www.nationthailand.com/business/30388241?utm_source=category&utm_medium=internal_referral

Somehow, I don't think THAI's woes are entirely CV19 related though - just like SAA.

john boye

Leaving aside any potential certification problems for the 777x, I have to wonder if it's just too big. I felt it before the pandemic and now it just seems a terrible time to be bringing it to the market. R&D costs would have been relatively low I'm sure though and they may be confident that orders will pick up in the next few years but I wouldn't be.

bk

john boye wrote: »

Leaving aside any potential certification problems for the 777x, I have to wonder if it's just too big. I felt it before the pandemic and now it just seems a terrible time to be bringing it to the market. R&D costs would have been relatively low I'm sure though and they may be confident that orders will pick up in the next few years but I wouldn't be.

Yep, I've had the same thoughts too. Almost a repeat of the A380, technically great, but too big and expensive for where the market is heading. And that was pre-covid19, much worse now, couldn't launch a plane like this at a worst time!

But as you say, development costs were likely relatively low, at least compared to the money sink that the A380 was. If they can keep the line going at a very low rate, potentially interest might pick up in the long term and they sell just about enough to break even.

Definitely won't be a big seller or big success. Had development not been so far along, it would probably have been scrapped.

Now they much more need to focus on what they are going to do about the Max. What are they going to do about the A220, which looks like it will be a massive success for Airbus, now that the Embraer deal has fallen through. And what about the middle of the market.

L1011

Airbus would never have got the A220 (at least not at the time they did) had Boeing not acted the maggot over it also - Bombardier would have kept trying on their own

IngazZagni

https://www.rte.ie/amp/1139995/

More bad news unfortunately. Although not unexpected due to the ongoing examinership. Up to 276 redundancies at Cityjet.

smurfjed

That sounds like it will impact RJ pilots rather than LIFO.

Sexual Chocolate

I definitely think after all this passes (hopefully it does) that the future of long haul aviation will be only be the 787 and A350 and possibly some new interest in the 330neo. Not too sure where to put the 777 tbh.

Unless Airbus come up with a cargo/combi conversion for the A380 there will potentially be none left in the skies in the next 7-10 years. 16 have being retired since the start of this pandemic alone.

Emirates plan on keeping theirs flying for another 15 years but that was something quoted pre Covid 19, and we know what Emirates can be like for changing there mind.

Air France have retired all of there's with immediate effect, Qatar, Qantas and Etihad aren't far behind either and Lufthansa has also planned to do the same favouring the 748 instead. Wouldn't be surprised to see BA and Singapore follow suit. Not sure where the Asian carriers stand but I know ANA only received their first last year....

Captain_Crash

Sexual Chocolate wrote: »

Emirates plan on keeping theirs flying for another 15 years but that was something quoted pre Covid 19, and we know what Emirates can be like for changing there mind.

It looks as if EK will be retiring 46 A380’s as a result of this

https://www.forbes.com/sites/willhorton1/2020/05/18/emirates-a380-retirement--aircraft-of-the-future-cut-short/

smurfjed

Not too sure where to put the 777 tbh

The 777 has a massive cargo carrying ability in passenger configuration that beats the others, so I expect them to stay around, maybe not the older -200’s, but the 300’s.

I’m interested in seeing how the “hub-spoke” system works, will people still be happy to travel to LHR or DXB en-route to their destination.

smurfjed

BTW, did anyone get to read the EASA rules for future flying? No duty free before or onboard, that’s going to wallop the shopping malls masquerading as airports.

Tenger

smurfjed wrote: »

BTW, did anyone get to read the EASA rules for future flying? No duty free before or onboard, that’s going to wallop the shopping malls masquerading as airports.

Airports get huge revenue from their sales.
Although I’ve been of the opinion that inflight shopping was on the way out anyway. Why buy sunglasses for €70 that can be bought online for a lot cheaper. It really just catered to the impulse buyers with lots of disposable cash.

Comhrá

Will the arrival of masks for all passengers mean the end of in-flight consumption of food and drinks? If that's the case, it would surely make a huge dent in revenue for airlines? It's hard to reconcile wearing masks and food/beverage service.

Caranica

smurfjed wrote: »

BTW, did anyone get to read the EASA rules for future flying? No duty free before or onboard, that’s going to wallop the shopping malls masquerading as airports.

Shop and collect on the way back? Shop online and collect on arrival? Will hit the whiskey and tayto buying American market alright.

Masala

smurfjed wrote: »

BTW, did anyone get to read the EASA rules for future flying? No duty free before or onboard, that’s going to wallop the shopping malls masquerading as airports.

Didn’t hear that.... is that all airport purchases or just ‘alcohol’???

Any link to the EAsA doc???

mikel97

smurfjed wrote: »

BTW, did anyone get to read the EASA rules for future flying? No duty free before or onboard, that’s going to wallop the shopping malls masquerading as airports.

Yes, Im looking at it now at work and no mention of restriction on duty free before boarding.

This cut n paste kinda summarises onboard

 No duty free or other non-essential product sales on board.
 Reduced food and drink service
 Preference for pre-packaged and sealed food and drink products, such as canned drinks
 Wherever possible, payment procedures involving touch or contact, such as cash payments, should be avoided to mitigate transmission between crew members and passengers.
Passengers should be reminded to remain seated with their seatbelt fastened as much as possible.

TheDriver

mikel97 wrote: »

Passengers should be reminded to remain seated with their seatbelt fastened as much as possible.

Thought that's the general idea before COVID19?

Tenger

Masala wrote: »

..................Any link to the EAsA doc???

https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/EASA-ECDC_COVID-19_Operational%20guidelines%20for%20management%20of%20passengers_final.pdf

That’s the 28 page document. Below is a synopsis from the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/21/the-future-of-flying-eu-air-safety-body-issues-coronavirus-guidelines

IngazZagni

Does the doc actually mention duty free sales in airports? I only read about on board duty free.

A lot of the stuff is ridiculous. Sounds like you'll be able to take your mask off for a panini and a drink but not for 2nd drink. Far too dangerous.

Anyway Ryanair have already said they do not intend to follow all Easa guidelines. For example they confirmed they will not clean aircraft between flights. Only at nighttime which is contrary to EASA advice.

Turbulent Bill

I wonder if we'll see any niche LCCs starting up if demand eventually starts to rise. Lots of cheap, fresh airframes available and low oil prices, which rarely occurs together, so a bare-bones operation wouldn't cost much to run.

Or is it so dire that only existing airlines with some kind of cash flow have any hope of operating?

TheDriver

Spain has announced that tourists are welcome from July. Tourist attractions are to be ready. From Spanish PM

kevinandrew

Turbulent Bill wrote: »

I wonder if we'll see any niche LCCs starting up if demand eventually starts to rise. Lots of cheap, fresh airframes available and low oil prices, which rarely occurs together, so a bare-bones operation wouldn't cost much to run.

Or is it so dire that only existing airlines with some kind of cash flow have any hope of operating?

It took at least 18-24 months after 9/11 for that first low cost boom, particularly in Europe. I remember by 2003/04 it felt like they were everywhere! Most have obviously now vanished or been absorbed; Go, Buzz, Snowflake, SkyEurope, Clickair, Zoom, Eos, MaxJet etc.

This downturn is much deeper and will likely last much longer. The little known low cost airlines were seen as safer after 9/11 as the national airlines appeared to be the targets but in this crisis there is no “safe” airline, they all face the same problems equally.

JohnC.

TheDriver wrote: »

Spain has announced that tourists are welcome from July. Tourist attractions are to be ready. From Spanish PM

He also guarantees that there will be no risk to visitors and visitors will bring no risk to locals.

Seems a rather odd guarantee to give.

Comhrá

JohnC. wrote: »

He also guarantees that there will be no risk to visitors and visitors will bring no risk to locals.

Seems a rather odd guarantee to give.

Sounds a bit Trumpesque.

TheDriver

JohnC. wrote: »

He also guarantees that there will be no risk to visitors and visitors will bring no risk to locals.

Seems a rather odd guarantee to give.

He has to make it sound attractive I suppose. So you can be in Spain on a terrace drinking pints on 1st July but you can't here until mid Aug. Mad.

Impetus

Forget about so called 'duty free'.

Do not use aircraft toilets. While many aircraft manufacturers offer UV light disinfection of toilets, which takes place between each user event, neither Ryanair nor Aer Lingus have this option on any aircraft I have used.

Confined spaces and aerosols are the spreader of this virus. As is low humidity (all jets have low humidity in the air supply), and many airlines limit the air changes to save fuel. Back in the day when idiots smoked while flying, this was not an issue as airlines had to change the air to remove the smoke. Any virus loves low humidity (and cold air). A virus can last for two years in a freezer at -20C.

Irish airports use hot air hand dryers, instead of paper towels (as in Munich airport and all airports, trains, and rail stations on the Swiss Travel System). The air blade hand dryers are the worst - they blow the stuff into your face. Many people using airport public toilets only rinse their hands (rather than a 30 sec wash with soap and warm water). As a result the air blade dryers are blowing other peoples' bacteria into your respiratory system. In a test I came across a vew years ago, the air blade hand dryer blows 2000x the bacteria of a paper towel. One is better off avoiding public toilets, and in case of need, wash one's hands and let them dry in the ambient air.


Video on UVC sanitizer: https://youtu.be/WRXZjLk_4Hk
https://time.com/5825860/coronavirus-robot/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKFsYaMj1_k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hs_sNGIUls

JohnC.

Are the airports still using air dryers right now? I know many places have followed advice to turn them off and install paper instead.

WishUWereHere

JohnC. wrote: »

Are the airports still using air dryers right now? I know many places have followed advice to turn them off and install paper instead.

My OH works in the HSE & they were issued with instructions just like You say JohnC, with one other critical instruction: When finished washing your hands, DO NOT turn off the tap ( unless the water flow is controlled by a lever where you can use your elbow). You must dry your hands with the paper towel, and then turn the water off using the used paper towel, and bin the towel immediately on turning the water off.

Impetus

JohnC. wrote: »

Are the airports still using air dryers right now? I know many places have followed advice to turn them off and install paper instead.

I hope so. Even if they don't install paper towel systems. Just stop the fans!

Impetus

WishUWereHere wrote: »

My OH works in the HSE & they were issued with instructions just like You say JohnC, with one other critical instruction: When finished washing your hands, DO NOT turn off the tap ( unless the water flow is controlled by a lever where you can use your elbow). You must dry your hands with the paper towel, and then turn the water off using the used paper towel, and bin the towel immediately on turning the water off.

The tap water in Dublin airport is often 'too hot to handle' ie not comfortable, which is a waste of energy, an does not promote through hand washing - ie 30 seconds with soap, as opposed to a quick rinse. And it is a waste of energy. Probably because the so called 'civil servants' who mis-manage most Irish airports appear to be only focused on their pension, rather than providing good/clean customer service.

https://interaktiv.tagesspiegel.de/lab/karte-sars-cov-2-in-deutschland-landkreise/

The statistics in the Die Coronavirus-Kurven im Vergleich – live of this German website show how Ireland is a basket case.

It would be hard to invent a more dysfunctional society than Ireland, especially in the viaral spread front. (Perhaps aside from Dumb Trumpland and Dumb Boris land).

IngazZagni

I dont think any airline uses the UV light cleaning yet as suggested here.

Also hand dryers are far more environmently friendly than paper towel systems. Thats why they were brought in. Of course this was in pre covid times.