Why does Emirates use so many Airbus A380 planes as opposed to twin engine planes which might be cheaper to operate?

1. The A380 is not “cheaper or comparable to operate” than the B777, on any route, with any load, although its profitability can be compelling. Much greater fuel burn is one major (but not the only) reason why the 380 costs more to operate. Consider this: for typical EK long-haul routes, the A380 burns about 13.3 tons of fuel per hour, while the B777 (-300ER) on the same routes burns about 8 tons per hour; on a long LAX or SFO sector (which both aircraft have flown, for EK), this means the A380 burns about 72 tons (more than 93,000 liters) more fuel than the B777 does on the exact same route;

2. EK A380’s have either of two seating configurations (First/Business/Economy): 14/76/399 or 14/76/427. That’s a total pax capacity (per plane) of 489 or 517, not 644.As for EK B777-300ER’s, the seating capacities are split between several different configurations, with almost all three-class EK 777-300-ER’s having either 08/42/304 or 08/42/310 (the two-class EK 777-300ER’s have 00/42/385), for a total (EK B777-300ER) pax capacity (per plane) of 354; 360; or 427. The higher capacity (two-class) EK A380’s are planned but not yet delivered nor operating. The comments in other posts stating that “the A380 carries almost double the passengers of the B777” is factually incorrect, and more than just slightly so: the difference in the current EK A380 and B777-300ER seating configurations is between 21-38% greater capacity on the A380 (see actual EK seating capacities, above). Even with the future-planned addition of 615-seat (oo/58/557) two-class EK A380’s, the difference in capacity between EK’s “high-density” (two-class) 380’s and 777’s will be 44% (greater capacity for the 380). This is not an insignificant number (which is why it can work), but it’s misleading hyperbole to characterize it as “nearly double”;

3. Where the profit potential of the A380 comes into full bloom (as has been approximated, yet slightly missed in the previous posts) is with the filling of what Emirates calls “premium cabin” seats (First Class, and, in the case of the A380, particularly Business Class seats). The reason is simple: EK A380’s have 14 First Class seats and a whopping 76 Business Class seats. EK B777’s are configured with 8 First Class seats and 42 Business Class seats (the few remaining EK 777-200ER’s, which are rapidly being retired and replaced with -300ER’s, have 12 FC seats). This means EK A380’s have six (75%) more First Class seats and 34 (81%) more Business Class seats than EK’s B777-300ER’s. At USD $11,735 for a First Class seat (DXB-LAX round-trip, two-weeks advance purchase) and USD $6,000 for a Business Class seat (same conditions), the additional premium cabin seating capacity of the A380 “suddenly” becomes highly compelling: the six additional First Class seats create a gross yield of more than USD $70,000 extra, while the additional 34 Business Class seats will yield a whopping USD $204,000 extra! That’s more than USD $274,000 additional profit potential advantage to the A380, just from additional “premium cabin” (First and Business) seats. The USD $70,000 “advantage” in the First Class cabin alone would more than pay for the entire 197,000 kg fuel burn to LAX on the A380! So…the [selling of] a relatively large number of “premium cabin” (First Class, and especially Business Class seats), is what really makes the A380 a profitable proposition for EK. Parenthetically, while many EK flights (all fleets) do not “sell out” in First Class, the same is not true in Business Class, where all or most seats are often sold out. The difference in Economy (Coach) class seating between EK’s A380’s and B777’s is minimally consequential in the profit picture, as the per-seat yield is quite low, and the difference in Economy Class seating capacity of EK’s A380’s and B777’s is actually as little as 14-42 seats (EK 380’s have two different Economy Class seating capacities: 399 or 427, while their 777-300ER’s range from 304-385 Economy Class seats);

4. The B777 remains the world-record holder for maximum [un-refueled] range by a comfortable margin (not the newer 787): the B777-200LR has repeatedly exceeded 17,400 km (9,400 nm), while the longest range 787-900 has (a yet undemonstrated) potential for around 15,400 km (8,300 nm); the B777-300ER range is around 14,500 km (7,800 nm), while the A380-800 range is in the neighborhood of 15,700 km (8,500 nm). All figures above represent range at maximum payload. Before the EK A380 took over much of the USA routes from the B777 (about two years ago), EK B777-300ER’s and B777-200LR’s were operating those very same routes profitably.The reason the A380 took over those routes was the greater profitability of the [much larger number of] premium (i.e. high-dollar) seats on the A380 (see #3, above). The question faced by EK was never “Which aircraft is cheaper (or more expensive) to operate on these routes?” but instead, “Can we increase profits by consistently selling a greater number of premium cabin seats?” (i.e. A380). The answer, ostensibly, has been “Yes”;

5. Emirates has outstanding orders for 79 A380-800’s, 48 B777-300ER’s, and 150B777-8X/9X aircraft. This clearly indicates EK’s belief in the enduring value proposition of the B777 model. The characterization that EK operates the A380 on “high demand routes” and the B777 on “regional routes…like in Asia” is really inaccurate and misleading. The B777 continues to profitably fly ultra-long haul routes to destinations on all six of the populated continents, including non-stop to the USA (SEA; ORD; IAD; MCO); Australia (PER; MEL; ADL); South America (GRU); and others;

6. The observation that people (customers) are lured by “the latest and biggest thing” is demonstrably true, hence the popularity of the A380: it’s the latest and biggest thing around (EK won’t be getting the 787, as it’s actually smaller than the B777, and hence, too small for their needs). The marketing value and “sex appeal” of operating the greatest number of “the latest and biggest thing around” simply cannot be understated: people are fickle, and “bragging rights” apparently translate directly into dollars for many of us (in fairness, the premium cabin in the A380 is comfortable and spacious [particularly with the FC showers and the premium cabin lounge, aft], although many actually prefer the wider, roomier Business Class seats in EK’s B777’s);

7. Comments regarding significant fuel price advantages for EK and the other Middle Eastern carriers are undoubtedly valid, and such advantages benefit the A380 even more than the B777, as the former needs to sell more of its premium cabin seats than the latter, to offset its higher direct operating costs.

Emirates’ inventory has a smorgasbord of planes, but the two models that number the most are the Airbus A380, and the Boeing 777.

In between the two, given that you can fill all of the seats, the A380 and the Boeing 777 have comparable operating costs. Maintenance costs way more on the A380 than the 777, but the enormously reduced fuel costs per passenger (assuming you sell all seats) offset that cost.

But it’s the UAE and they bathe in oil. Fuel costs don’t really matter that much over there, and the A380 costs more to maintain. So why use so many A380s?

Let’s crunch some numbers. Emirates has 130 Boeing 777s and 55 A380s. Assuming the average seating capacity of all their 777s are 375 (it’s a nice round number in between the minimum of 314 and the maximum of 451), they have 48,750 seats on their 777s. The A380 seats a whopping 644 passengers as per Emirates’ order, but if you do the math here, across 55 aircraft, that’s just 35,420 seats.

So Emirates actually operates more seats on the Boeing 777 than on the A380.

The Boeing 777 used to hold the world record for range before the 787 Dreamliner beat it hands down. The A380 holds the world record for capacity, but the 777 just edges it out in the range department.

But that doesn’t really matter, because the A380 still operates the longest non-stop scheduled commercial flight (Quantas QF7/8 between DFW and Sydney-Kingsford), and the A380 operates Emirates’ longest flight as well (EK215, between Dubai and LAX).

So?

Demand.

If you have two aircraft that can operate the same route, and you have only 370ish passengers, you operate the 777. It might cost more per passenger, but it still costs a ton less in total. If you have a high-demand route, you operate the A380.

And Emirates operates both types of routes - low demand and high demand. However, their long haul intercontinental routes have really high demand, so they use the A380s exclusively to operate flights to DFW, Houston and SFO. Their 777s operate the more regional routes (as far as regional international flights go), like to destinations in Asia.

Which might explain why they have orders for 85 more A380s but only 51 more Boeing 777s.