Qantas superjumbo causes a super headache at airport

[Bernie P]

Qantas superjumbo causes a super headache at airport
Scott Rochfort and Matt O'Sullivan
January 29, 2009

QANTAS'S A380 superjumbo has caused such a kerfuffle in Los Angeles that air traffic controllers have warned its arrival is creating tarmac gridlock at one of the world's busiest airports.

Even before Qantas's first A380 was grounded at Los Angeles on Tuesday for several hours due to a technical hitch, concerns had been raised the jet hampers operations there.

The Los Angeles Times reported the jet is so disruptive at the airport that service roads and taxiways are being shut when it arrives or departs. It reportedly requires an "official escort" of operational vehicles every time it taxis, and it disrupts the radio signals from the airport's instrument landing system.

Controllers say it is only because of the slump in air traffic since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, that the airport can manage the A380.

"If we go back to pre-recession operations levels, the situation would be untenable. There would be gridlock," the airport representative for the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, Mike Foote, told the Times.

Airbus disputed the complaints. "If there is a problem at Los Angeles, and I don't know that there is, it seems that Los Angeles has a problem of their own making," an Airbus spokesman, Ted Porter, said.

A Qantas spokesman said the airline had been working with the airport for several months.

Source: - SMH (http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/superjumbo-causes-a-super-headache/2009/01/28/1232818532096.html)

[Robert Zweck]

....heart skips a beat.....

For a moment there I thought Qantas were at fault.....

[Philip Argy]

What about "LAX can't handle big planes"? :eek:

[NickN]

What about "LAX can't handle big planes"?

Thats more the point. What a stupid idea blaming the operator.

[Krzysztof M]

Manufacturer rather.

[Philip Argy]

If they didn't want the A380 they could have saved themselves a lot of infrastructure upgrade expenditure. And if they do want it then they should have put in a bit more logistics planning effort.

What is going to happen when more airlines take their A380 to LAX (assuming they won't now change their plans to do so).

Hard to believe big planes are a problem in the country that invented upsizing!

[Mick F]

It's French, of course it's a problem for America. Bet if it was Boeing it wouldn't be a problem at all.

Mick

[Andrew McLaughlin]

It's French, of course it's a problem for America. Bet if it was Boeing it wouldn't be a problem at all.

Mick

Especially as a 747-400 takes up the same amount of space, and has similar issues with blocking the ILS signal when it passes the transmitter...:rolleyes:!

[Shameel Kumar]

It reportedly requires an "official escort" of operational vehicles every time it taxis...

Ah, so that's what the escort of police-like vehicles was. Makes sense now. For a few moments I thought there may have been a police-related issue onboard as we arrived into LAX, but a closer look at the vehicle revealed they had 'LAX' signage.
Must be a real cozy job just sitting in a car and watching the A380 taxi to its gate.... donut and coffee in-hand. Here's a shot of one of the 'operationa escort vehicle's.

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/6636/cdsc03939tz2.jpg

[Bob C]

THREE airlines are flying A380s into Heathow and Sydney will join that club on Monday when Emirates joins Singapore Airlines and QANTAS.

And A380s are apparently flying into several other airports without any problems so perhaps the fault lies with the LAX administrators.

[Montague S]

LAX is, and has been, a dump for many years!

[Philip Argy]

LAX is, and has been, a dump for many years!

As a solicitor it's always fun to go through Tom Bradley Terminal where the perpetual recorded message is "Please do not give money to solicitors".

Of course they mean vagrants and beggars but it was alarming the very first time I heard it as a young solicitor on my first trip to USA in 1982.

[D Chan]

Controllers say it is only because of the slump in air traffic since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, that the airport can manage the A380.

not a credible statement - sept 11th happened 7-8 years ago. Has little or no bearing on an airport accomodating the a380. But then we all know how credible the media is!

[Rhys Xanthis]

I'd prefer for them to show some evidence that air traffic has dropped since sept 11...

[Mike W]

Just as a matter of interest. Where does an Airport get an ROI on money they spend to accomodate the 380? BTW, this is a genuine question. :confused:

[Shameel Kumar]

Just as a matter of interest. Where does an Airport get an ROI on money they spend to accomodate the 380? BTW, this is a genuine question. :confused:

I guess some of it would come from the landing fees, as well as increased revenue from airport tax for passengers as a result of increased passengers numbers that the A380 is supposed to bring.
Also, I'd imagine it's a long-term investment since the A380 isn't going anywhere for many many years (just like the 747), so it's less of an option and more of a neccessity to investment the money to facilitate A380 operations.

Any idea if airlines foot a portion of the bill to make an airport A380-compatible.. or would they only have to pay for airline-specific extras such as an all-glass aerobridge for EK First Class passengers (that's just my idea...but I'm suprised they haven't thought of it!) ??

[Mike W]

I'd imagine it's a long-term investment since the A380 isn't going anywhere for many many years (just like the 747), so it's less of an option and more of a neccessity to investment the money to facilitate A380 operations.

Pretty much what I was thinking. No wonder LAX is reluctant to get too carried away with the behemmoth. They would account for a miniscule percentage of their business, yet command huge costs to accomodate. Even if they're (380) not going away, they're not exactly going to be every second aircraft either with only a handful of airlines ever going to use them.

[Kieran Wells]

Must be a slow day for news, and this has been bought up again...

from http://www.news.com.au/travel/story/0,28318,25128520-5014090,00.html


THE giant Qantas Airbus A380 is too big for Los Angeles international airport.

As Qantas plunges billions on the aircraft, LA air traffic controllers warned that, without changes, they may have no choice but to turn away the world's biggest passenger planes, the Daily Telegraph reported.

America's National Air Traffic Controllers Association believes Los Angeles airport would be unable to accommodate the A380 if not for the recession-related slump in air traffic.

"It is pretty inconvenient moving that Airbus around the airport," the association's LA tower president Mike Foote said yesterday. "There are restrictions that apply to that aircraft that don't apply to others."

Its enormous wingspan was too broad for the existing runway and each time an A380 landed, all ground traffic on the tarmac had to be brought to a standstill, he said.

"They are 50ft (16m) wider than any other aircraft we have so it causes all sorts of problems," Mr Foote said.

The aircraft, which has been flying to LA from Melbourne and Sydney since October, carries between 450 and 853 passengers over two levels and has room for 50 per cent more cargo than most other planes.

Its wings measure about 80m from tip to tip, the tail is 24m tall and its maximum take-off weight is 544 tonnes. That compares with a Boeing 747, the tail of which measures 20m and wingspan 64m.

Australia's national carrier has invested heavily in the A380, with plans to have seven in the air by the end of this year and a fleet of 20 in operation by 2013.

Now Qantas has three in the air - two flying to Los Angeles from Melbourne and Sydney and a third A380 covering the London route. They cost about $350 million each.

The A380 Qantas route had "worked well to date" but the airline was hustling to improve infrastructure at LA, a Qantas spokesman said.

"The city has always been fully aware of our requirements and of the economic benefits our A380 operations bring," said the spokesman. "Airports need to be able to handle these larger aircraft and we are working with the airport to develop longer-term infrastructure improvement options."

Qantas is the only airline running A380s at LAX, Mr Foote said. It runs six flights from Melbourne and Sydney a week, three from each city.

Mr Foote said, even if there were four or five A380 flights into the airport each day, the operation would crumble and flights across the airport would face chronic delays.

"Because of the recession, the traffic has gone down somewhat but at pre-recession traffic levels it would be almost impossible to move around the airport," he said.

The association is pressing for a new, bigger runway on the other side of the airport. Average daily landings and departures at LA airport have dropped 1000 to 1500 since 2000 amid fuel price rises, terrorism fears and the economic downturn.

[Robert S]

Must be a slow day for news, and this has been bought up again...

So slow in fact that it made the front page banner on The Daily Telegraph print edition.

[Kieran Wells]

So slow in fact that it made the front page banner on The Daily Telegraph print edition.

ended up going down to grab some food for a meeting tonight from franklins and grabbed the paper and there it was...when i first saw it this morning it was sitting 5th top news story on the website...

[Annette Logan]

It still means that LA has a huge problem if they can not handle one A380 then how are they going to be when other airlines want to fly there.

It is a wake up call for Emirates and Singapore and them flying to LA if the city can not handle one.

Bit silly if you ask me but anyway, would this stop Qantas from flying the
A380 there if it becomes a real problem?

I mean what can either of them do, of course LA has to upgrade their airport but for now what can happen beside Qantas still flying the A380 there and LA dealing with it.

[Andrew M]

Oh yes LAX is going to turn away the A380..:rolleyes::rolleyes:

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/feb/15/business/fi-airbus15

"Los Angeles World Airports expects to spend about $121 million by 2009 to ready the airport for the A380, which carries at least 140 more passengers than a Boeing 747, currently the largest passenger jet in service."

Dunno how much they have actually spent, but not sure why LAX keep mentioning how they don't like the A380.

[Annette Logan]

Oh yes LAX is going to turn away the A380..:rolleyes::rolleyes:

I know they won't turn the A380 away but I was wondering what would happen if this is when LA is at their low point so they say, what happens when they become busier again and more airlines start flying more aircraft again

I personally think LA should have thought ahead if they have problems when there is a recession, Qantas won't stop flying the A380 and it would be stupid for LA to turn the plane away.

[Bob C]

Emirates is flying the A380 into JFK - is JFK having any problems ?

Qantas, Singapore and Emirates have several A380s a day into Heathrow - is Heathrow having any problems ?

Qantas, Singapore and Emirates have several A380s a day into Sydney - is Sydney having any problems ?

Several more airports around the world have A380 flights - are they having problems ?

I think the big problem is with the L A administrators who just want to deflect the blame for their lack of preparedness !! They had plenty of forewarning. Admit you've got it wrong and do something about it for God's sake!!!

I wonder if they would be moaning if it was a Boeing 380 ?????

[Grant Smith]

Admit you've got it wrong and do something about it for God's sake!!!

Didn't realise God was a commercial airline traveller ;)

[Andrew McLaughlin]

Emirates is flying the A380 into JFK - is JFK having any problems ?

No, but JFK doesn't have four parellel runways in very close proximity to each other.

Qantas, Singapore and Emirates have several A380s a day into Heathrow - is Heathrow having any problems ?

No, but Heathrow doesn't have four parallel runways in very close proximity to each other.

Qantas, Singapore and Emirates have several A380s a day into Sydney - is Sydney having any problems ?

No, but Sydney doesn't have four parallel runways in very close proximity to each other.

Several more airports around the world have A380 flights - are they having problems ?

No, but...you get the idea...

I think the big problem is with the L A administrators who just want to deflect the blame for their lack of preparedness !! They had plenty of forewarning. Admit you've got it wrong and do something about it for God's sake!!!

I wonder if they would be moaning if it was a Boeing 380 ?????

LA has done more than most in preparing for the 380, but it was always restricted in what it could do due to its tight layout and restrictive terminal layouts - they even have to tow 747s onto their gates, let alone 380s.

The 380, especially when it's holding for takeoff, apparently blocks the ILS for both the runway it is waiting for and the adjacent parallel runway, thus meaning it has to be given priority take off clearance to minimise this. Similarly, when a 380 is taxiing on Charlie for a RWY25L departure, due to its proximity to RWY25R, I think there are restrictions in the size of aircraft able to use 25R. And if arriving on 25L, due to its size the 380 is given priority to cross 25R into the TBIT rather than hold betwen runways.

Is Will, AJ, Bill or someone who has operated into LA able to provide some perspective?

Cheers

[Nigel C]

Didn't realise God was a commercial airline traveller ;)

It's not a widely published thing. Apparently he travels on El Al, et al!

[NickN]

It's not a widely published thing. Apparently he travels on El Al, et al!


He's King Of The Jews, of course he travels with El Al. I heard he hates the tight security though.

[Ryan P]

Found these documents on LAX Runway Saftey

http://www.ourlax.org/pdf/PublicMeetings_AirfieldOperations_20061025.pdf

http://www.lawa.org/uploadedfiles/lax/pdf/North%20Airfield%20Safety%20Background%20(Ray%20Ja ck).pdf

good to help understand issues at LAX.

[Bill S]

Is Will, AJ, Bill or someone who has operated into LA able to provide some perspective?

I haven't been there since 2000, but taxying a 747 around LAX is kinda like driving a huge bus around the middle of Sydney CBD.
It's possible, but very unwieldy and made me nervous. I can only imagine with the increase in traffic how the larger A380 would be.
I remember once, after a ten hour flight from Nadi, we had to hold out on a remote taxyway for 45 mintues to wait for our bay to be opened. Pax not happy ....

[Bob C]

Thanks for the clarification, Andrew. I was unaware of the operational issues involved.

I know that LAX is the world's fourth busiest airport by aircraft movements but the point I was trying to make was that surely the administrators, managers and planners could have foreseen potential problems years ago and been proactive in finding solutions before the A380 started flying into LAX.

Would the problems coming to light now have been apparent during route proving flights or demos at LAX ? If there were any doubts, did the administrators advise QANTAS and other operators accordingly ? Would QANTAS have overlooked any such advice and carried on regardless ? I don't know !

I guess Emirates and Singapore (and other future operators of the A380) are following this saga with interest as it may well affect any plans they might have to fly their A380s into LAX.

I wonder if QANTAS would consider withdrawing the A380 from LAX altogether ?

[Montague S]

given the financial state of CA I highly doubt that the problem will be fixed soon, LAX has been in a constant state of repair for years now, and its still a hole!

[Grant Smith]

He's King Of The Jews, of course he travels with El Al. I heard he hates the tight security though.

You've got the wrong bloke there Nick... The King of the Jews is Jesus Christ... :rolleyes:

It's not a widely published thing. Apparently he travels on El Al, et al!

Makes sense ;)

[Montague S]

You've got the wrong bloke there Nick... The King of the Jews is Jesus Christ... :rolleyes:



Makes sense ;)

some might say its Theodore Herzl...

[Andrew M]

I remember once, after a ten hour flight from Nadi, we had to hold out on a remote taxyway for 45 mintues to wait for our bay to be opened. Pax not happy ....

Happened to me about a month ago on the A380 but this was the full situation.

While checking the arrivals and departures the night before for QF93: MEL-LAX I noticed that it said QF93 as cancelled.

Rang Qantas and they denied any problem, I pushed the point and they came back to me and said yes we are now flying MEL-SYD-LAX to pick up people who were on the cancelled A380 SYD-LAX.

Original plan was a 4 hour delay getting into LAX, and I would miss my onward flights (not connecting and not on QF) So I rebooked and paid lots of $$$$ for new flights leaving 8 hours between the original arrival time and scheduled departure time of the LAX onwards flight.

We left MEL on time, landed in SYD and headed to the lounge.

Scheduled departure I cannot remember now, but the time came and past and no announcement. Lots of us kept going to the counter and asking when we would be leaving and we were told soon soon.

Boarded the plane 1 hour later than scheduled, and we sat and sat and sat. Eventually the Captain came on and said due to a "catering issue, and a broken fridge in first class, they needed to re-cater some more food and we would be leaving in about 15 minutes. Eventually left 2 hour late out of SYD and landed at LAX 6 hours late, leaving 2 hours to clear customs etc etc and walk to the other terminal.

After landing we taxied and stopped out near the remote bays and waited and waited again... The Captain came on again, so we expected bad news, we had to wait for a plane to clear out gate first. 30 mins late another announcment that the plane in our gate cannot push back yet as they have a door malfunction and they are waiting on technicians. Eventually got to the gate after a 1 hour delay of sitting at the back area of the airport, with the Police escort.

This gave us 1 hour to get to the next flight, which we managed as there was no-one at all in front of us in immigration and the bags were on the seperate First/Business carousel :D

Also got a $300 voucher in the mail a few days later as an apology for the delays. So I can forgive QF for this ***** up!

As for LAX airport the whole TBIT area for the A380 flights is a shambles at the moment, so much work going on, dark, messy but at least a few of the gate areas are nice and new.

[Annette Logan]

Oh ok thanks for that, I now have a better understanding on that Andrew. Boy they all needed to really think ahead with this plane a bit more didn't they.

Interesting how one big plane can bring a whole airport to a stand still.

[Nigel C]

Boy they all needed to really think ahead with this plane a bit more didn't they.


Perhaps it's more a case of airports not thinking a little more ahead in terms of future aircraft size potential?
The same can be said about road designs, where they plan for the current traffic flow at the time of planning and not for 20-30 years time! But that's for another forum.