Live data from Hacker News

Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

smh.com.au

91–100 of 251 posts

Re: Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

#91
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of the engine manufacturers are interested. That's what killed the A380--Rolls Royce pulled out of a re-engine deal that would've brought A380 engines into the 21st century. "Green" concept showcases notwithstanding, all the engine manufactures seem to have decided to cut back on investment and coast for awhile. Something will need to change to spur competition in the engine space, and then we might see hungrier…

The latest and greatest engines are not that far from the theoretical thermodynamic efficiency limit. So future designs are running into the hard part of the asymptote. I doubt airlines are actually interested in committing tens of billions of capital, today, to get a dozen % improvement in fuel efficiency a decade from now. And why would a private investor take such a huge risk without guarantees of making it back s…

Sure, it's obviously a matter of diminishing returns and opportunity cost. But the re-engine for the A380 was basically a rote, low-risk, B-team exercise for Rolls Royce. All they had to do was tweak their existing generation stuff. The program was already well underway, and they still dropped it; they all but explicitly said the reason was, "meh, we lost interest". Something seems to have changed.

Putting my cynical cap on, my hot take is this: Everybody now realizes that Emirates and Clark are exactly right. As was Airbus.[1] Demand will blow past supply (i.e. runways and gates). Ticket prices will sky rocket. But from the perspective of the plane and engine manufacturers this translates to, "if everybody sits on their hands and does nothing, we're going to enjoy a windfall of profits". Clearly, IMO, Boeing, all the engine manufacturers, and now (somewhat despite themselves) Airbus, are going to passively collude[2] to bring about this windfall. All they need to do is sit tight and wait things out. The threat of competition isn't significant enough to break the collusion; there are too few players, the barriers to entry--regulation, technical and logistical expertise, etc--too steep, and like with housing little prospect that political reforms will make it easier to build enough new runways and airports to change the capacity trajectory.

Similar calculus applies to most of the established carriers. There's much more competition among them, but if the manufacturers are expected to continue to coast there's no angle to exploit in that regard and thus little incentive to agitate for disruption along this dimension, and so the carriers also get to look forward to windfall profits, notwithstanding that they'll be forking over much of it to the manufacturers. Clark just isn't cold-blooded enough to want to play that game; he's got too much of a fighting spirit. (Or perhaps more realistically it's also because if Emirates doesn't keep growing it won't be viable in this prospective future reality?)

[1] Boeing wasn't wrong, either, but point-to-point only bought a couple of decades of supply expansion.

[2] I think there's an economics term for this, but I don't remember it.

Re: Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

#92

I just got back from a road trip where I visited this boneyard (among other things) in the Mojave Desert.[0][1][2] The airport/planes are all fenced in, but you can still go up to the fence and see them up close. Pretty wild to see so many planes in one place. [0] https://www.dropbox.com/s/wjkmpacv7yvpur5/PXL_20230411_00382... [1] https://www.dropbox.com/s/2pgdlmn7z9ej0rc/PXL_20230411_00433... [2] https://www.dropbox…

Thanks for sharing these. I wasn't expecting an Air NZ plane when I clicked on the links – my father (a pilot) flew that exact plane when he was rated on the 777 over 15-years ago.

Re: Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea being that producing the biofuel took carbon from the atmosphere (in particular algae crops [1]), vs releasing co2 that had been sitting harmlessly underground prior to being burned. Does producing biofuel not pull carbon away from the atmosphere? Am I misunderstanding your point? [1] https://researchportal.bath.ac.uk/en/publications/bio-aviati...

Let's say you have a log from a tree you just chopped down. You have the same amount of wood dug up as coal. Each emits the same CO2 when burned. Where is the net decrease in CO2? What difference does it make being fossilized?

You're missing the fact that I'm also growing said trees. If I plant a bunch of trees to sell the lumber as firewood, I turn around and plant more trees so I can sell more wood in the future. Those trees capture the C02 released by the first batch, and then I sell them again. This is especially true with algae ponds, because 1) there's no chance there was an existing algae pond that would put me 1 batch in the hole on carbon neutrality and 2) it takes a lot less energy to grow and harvest.

In contrast, digging up coal has no carbon recapture stage. I dig up coal, it gets burned, releasing C02, I dig up more coal.

No one's saying biofuel is carbon negative. But it's pretty close to carbon neutral.

Re: Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

#95

> striving to meet their emissions-reduction goal of carbon neutrality by 2050. This is part of the reason Qantas has invested heavily in kick-starting Australia’s sustainable aviation fuel industry. This is one of the most destructive frauds otherwise intelligent people are suckered into. It's based on the idiotic notion that a C atom from a biofuel results in "green" CO2 emissions. The CO2 emitted is exactly the sa…

They use carbon capture to collect the C atom, and then release it back in the atmosphere.

Re: Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

#96
post #93

Why were they parked in the USA? During Covid a number of asian airlines parked their planes in Australian deserts.

There are still a variety of planes parked at the airport in Alice Springs (central Australia). Maybe it's a size thing with using Victorville over Alice?

Re: Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carbon neutrality means "no net increase" not a net decrease.

I do know what the words mean. Throwing the log in a landfill (or building a house with it) would accomplish the same thing, and is a heluva lot cheaper.

The difference is that no one is paying me to bury a bunch of logs.

The fact is, there is ample demand for high density energy storage. People want to go places, people want stuff brought to them. Until battery technology makes a massive leap into the realm of eating roses and shitting rainbows, combustible fuels are the only economically feasible option.

In that realm, our options are A) keep digging up fossil fuels, then burning producing a bunch of C02, or B) capturing a bunch of C02, turning it into biofuel, then burning it to release the same amount of C02.

Put in simple math terms:

   Fossil fuels: net CO2 = CO2 from energy to extract + CO2 from burning
   Biofuels: net C02 = CO2 from energy to extract + (CO2 from burning - CO2 from growing) 
                     = CO2 from energy to extract

Re: Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

#98
post #93

Why were they parked in the USA? During Covid a number of asian airlines parked their planes in Australian deserts.

Victorville preferable due to lower humidity then alice, for longer term storage its desirable

Alice is more fun because you can find snakes on your planes when you go to get them

Re: Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's clear that different fuels can have a different carbon impact. A "C atom from a biofuel" may in isolation be indistinguishable from one sourced from a fossil fuel, but it is exactly not the same in terms of its impact; claiming so is obviously disingenuous. None of this means that biofuels are actually an effective method to reduce the carbon impact of aviation. Life-cycle analysis is pretty hard. We can broadly…

> A "C atom from a biofuel" may in isolation be indistinguishable from one sourced from a fossil fuel, but it is exactly not the same in terms of its impact How does it result in less CO2 in the atmosphere?

Because the fuel is grown and used instead of refined fuel from ancient oil.

Carbon neutral.

Standard fuel: I dig up one carbon. I burn this carbon. One carbon is now in atmosphere.

Biofuel: I grow one carbon. one carbon is now taken from the atmosphere. We are at minus one carbon. I burn this carbon. We are back to net zero carbon taken or added.

Re: Qantas is bringing back Airbus A380s from the California desert

#100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can tell demand is high because ticket prices are very high. Airlines have opted and are opting to fly fewer planes with higher ticket prices. It's a price over volume optimisation that seems to be in fashion in many industry segments. [0] I will note that some airlines have been affected very badly by issues with rebuilding staffing in ancillary services like luggage and airport security. That uncertainty I thin…

Ticket prices are high because demand in the front of the plane is low. Economy class tickets have to go up a lot to make up for empty first and business seats.

They've gone up in the front cabin(s) as well. Sometimes quite a lot.
Post reply on HN