what was the problems?

@@imnamu7047 transporting large numbers across vast distances to get them from hub to hub as efficiently as possible. The need for a hub and spoke model has been reduced through more direct point to point flights, largely thanks to more efficient and higher range smaller aircraft.

@@commerce-usa This may be more true once Heathrow gets its third runway and/or Gatwick upgrades to a second runway.

The interiors were also highly outdated and too expensive to replace. It was not a prefered ride for premium traffic.

@@johniii8147 Yeah, crews were pissed by the dated cabin from day one and pressed management for an upgrade for years. In the meantime there were disagreements at the upper levels about buying additional aircrafts and retrofitting a newer top notch cabin. It ended up that nothing was decided...

@@KyrilPG One of big issues with the 380 is it's extremely expensive to change out. It's $30 to $40 million an aircraft. YOu're basically stuck with the original interior. BA/LH/AF were both hit with they didn't go with a new J class in particular on introduction and went with their older product. Probably because the the aircraft had delays and their was a lock down date on the interiors. Particularly with the 380 as custom as it was in construction you can't change that even a year out.

@@johniii8147 It's expensive yes but proportional to other aircrafts, not more. A part of AF's management had priced it and it was only a couple percent pricier than on a 777-300ER. On the other hand the work cost was lower due to faster modifications eased by the way the fitting system is designed. (And AF has a tight relationship with Airbus, Recaro and other seat manufacturers). So all in all it was the same cost per comparable number of seats. What's costly in the A380 is a deep configuration structural change, not a regular cabin product upgrade or a simple layout modification. AF doesn't have fancy custom over-the-top premium amenities like showers so the cost was roughly the same on a seat basis. You're way over budget > the complete fleet overhaul with ultra premium seating in 4 classes would have cost 200€ million all included for the A380 fleet (including the cost of each of the 10 aircraft's temporary grounding). The main problem was that the partly renewed head of AF was adamant that if A380's were to be retrofitted, the whole intercontinental 777 fleet equipped with first class would have to be retrofitted simultaneously or before. And that wasn't the same pricetag at all...

They bought it for the same reason as the concorde-national pride.

Not exactly : the problem was that they bought the wrong number of aircrafts. It was to many or too few but 10 wasn't enough for the number of their A380 destinations to make it profitable. There was internal projections that showed it could have very well worked with just a handful more planes. AF has a network that can perfectly handle and fill the A380, but they dispatched it very badly, in other terms they used it the wrong way. On Tokyo for example, the fact they regularly had an A380 flight only 5 days a week instead of 7 limited the business occupancy. And in the meantime they were completely full in business on the 777 and refusing clients... So it's really a shame and a huge waste, they could have made it work but they ruined it...

@UCMfsktwa67b_eJ7un4bx63A In high density ? Gosh no ! AF only uses high density 777-300's on its COI network (Caribbean Indian Ocean > overseas departments and territories) which is considered overseas domestic to sum it up. Paris has well enough premium demand and the A380 was very well suited for their network. They simply used it wrong, very wrong, just like several unions desperately and repeatedly screamed it at the management but they didn't listen. There even are unions that are still criticizing the management for wasting the potential of the aircraft and wasting the value of these aircrafts. And yes, companies can loose money by not having enough seats : when there's not enough seats on the return flights because the return is operated on 777 instead of A380 for example... Some incomprehensible decisions were made, like reducing the number of weekly flights on a destination that had profitable occupancy all week to dispatch 2 flights a week on another... 🤯 To this day a part of the crew and management is still wondering why. AF consistently missed opportunities with not enough capacity on high paying segments. By the way, AF's FF / credit card bonuses give very little access to business and first, it's completely different from US companies that give business seats to people who almost never fly but use the company card a lot. So no, you won't see many reward tickets seated in AF's front classes, much less than other major companies. Credit card miles aren't status miles on AF. AF missed huge opportunities every week, on several A380 destinations and neither pilots nor commercial crews understood why the management literally killed the potential of the model. Instead of using them all the week on fewer destinations (which would have left a couple aircrafts unused) or buying a few more to cover all A380 destinations they sprinkled the dozen aircrafts on too many destinations for only 3 to 5 flights a week on most destinations (except JFK which was usually 7/7). Some parliament members are investigating the badly planned dispatch and subsequent waste as it was demonstrated that just 2 to 5 more aircrafts would have rendered the fleet profitable and sufficiently occupied. And without resorting to lower fares either... There was a complicated turnover at the upper levels of Air France's management and tensions that precluded the company from buying more A380's or simply upgrading the cabin product and rethinking the dispatch. If BA and LH can make them work, so can AF. Each of the big Euro 3 has a different network but comparable high yield destinations with enough demand at full fare. Tokyo wasn't the exception, it was a similar issue on Joburg, LAX and Montreal... And a different one for JFK. We'll see what happens with the parliamentary inquiry, things are currently more focused on the world situation but the fact that such a huge potential was wasted isn't really appreciated by a LOT of people !

777-300er does the job to be honest, it's more fuel efficient and has the largest capacity of any twinjet, if you need a cheap version of the A380, just use the 777-300ER, otherwise, get a 747-8, its cheaper and capacity is still close enough to the A380

@@bossfight6125 No other plane has the business capacity and overall volume capacity of the A380. You can stuff close to 480 seats on the 777-300ER like Air France does with the high density cabin they use exclusively on their overseas territories sectors. But they use a 296 (new 4 class) or 380 (3 class no first) seater 777-300ER on their intercontinental network which is far less than the 510 seats with 80+ business of the A380. No other aircraft has the room the 510 seats of the AF A380 offer. Also you can't put as much business without almost completely wiping the economy class.

While seemingly a good idea, would 3rd world countries have the infrastructure to support these massive super jumbos?

@@commerce-usa The term '3rd world' refered to countries sided to Neither the US or Russia but its been badly misunderstood to mean 'poor countries' because neither of the previously mentioned countries seem to understand that other countries can be rich too

@@titan4110 yeah, okays. Think most people get what is being discussed. Poor nations that both need a flying hospital and tend to have little ability to spend the millions of dollars to upgrade an airport where 747s could already land, nevermind the cost of putting in a new facility for these aircraft. Do you feel better? 🙄

@@commerce-usa Yeah u didn't really understand what I said about the meaning of 3rd world. A country that actually needs a flying hospital barely has airports.

@@titan4110 Now I do. Simple works best and I agree.

On 777s it's even worse since the aircraft is far from being as comfortable and roomy as any 380.

Agree!

Unlikely as BA & AF selected different engine options.

@@sytrxrainz3769 I hadn't considered that. Maybe Lufthansa or Malaysian?

Who wants them? Too big. Too expensive to operate.

Also between London and Madrid lately.

That is actually wrong they were dissasmbled in Knock airport in the Republic of Ireland

No, they retired only one. All the othesr fly everywhere, just like Lufthansa does with its 747s.

@@julosx but i've seen images of an ex-emirates A380 in all white, as well as one in emirates paint scheme being scrapped

I think in today's environment, the use as an A380 freighter makes sense... Let us wait and see,

We'll see but Emirates use a different kind of engines for their A380's.

Not Malaysia, they are back in the sky these days.

No USA airlines flies them! Smart on their part!

🤣 BAHAHAHAAH!! 🤣 💥💨

You never flew in any so you should shut up.

So true, I agree 100%!

Say that to Emirates, you tool.