The A380

[TriJet]

gotta be the ugliest mofo ever.

 

[PropsForward]

Jealous?

 

[bobbysamd]

A380

Review of airline history in such books at Hard Landing by Petzinger shows that super-large aircraft are the banes of airlines. Airlines feel they have to purchase these aircraft because the others do, but have trouble filling all the seats and making money with them.

NPR ran a story this morning on the impact of super-large airliners. Many airports have to be modified to accomodate them, and that costs megabucks. So, these aircraft have a far greater impact than just carrying more pax.

 

[mobie]

After looking at the A-380 pix would have to call it BULL FROG

 

[Pugh]

As far as I'm concerned, the 747 is still the Queen of the Skies. The Airbus 380 is the fat jester that everyone laughs at.

The cockpit looks nice though, and the 380s unveiling has certainly created some entertaining posts on Airliners.net.

 

[OrphicSeth]

...and the 380s unveiling has certainly created some entertaining posts on Airliners.net.

I enjoyed a couple of good laughs myself this morning, that's for sure!

 

[Skyboss]

Fat chicks are good for one thing...

Eh.. Never mind. Bad joke.

 

[Fly BI]

Don't forget the Russians!

gotta be the ugliest mofo ever.

Perhaps...

I'm not in love with it, but I think most of the Russian commercial aircraft are far uglier, IMHO.

 

[Philso]

Let me get this right.

This is the aircraft that Boeing said was "too big" and that "no airline would buy such a large aircraft". This is the same aircraft that got the orders it required to start production, the same aircraft that Boeing said no one would use.

This is the same aircraft that made Boeing rethink their original statement about 'no airline would buy such a large aircraft' and made Boeing declare that it was going to extend the 747 by x feet and add y seats ( I forgot the stretch version number ) and after one year realized that no one wanted yet another stretch 747.

I bet that if the A380 had a 'Built by Boeing' logo on it somewhere, reaction in various forums would be different.

If someone offered you the left seat in a A380 for x dollar increase in salary, would you turn it down ?

And just a side question, with the exception of the dearly missed Concorde, why has the average speed of a commerical airliner not increased much over the last 25 to 30 years, it seems to be more about bigger and bigger aircraft.

 

[Big Duke Six]

Speed increases? It's called physics, look into it!


All chiding aside, it costs alot of money to go fast. Not to mention the sub-Mach 1 "speed limit" imposed on airplanes over the continental US. So between those two constraints, I'd say commercial airliners are about as fast as they are going to be for awhile. Most jets cruise at around .8 or so (ballpark) right now so it's not worth the $ to push farther since we can't go Mach 1 anyway. Just a gut feeling.

 

[414Flyer]

And just a side question, with the exception of the dearly missed Concorde, why has the average speed of a commerical airliner not increased much over the last 25 to 30 years, it seems to be more about bigger and bigger aircraft.

Actually it has gone down. 727 are fairly quick compared to a lot of airliners out there. Look what the Convair 880 and 990 could do

 

[Philso]

the $ to push farther since we can't go Mach 1 anyway. Just a gut feeling.

I am not talking about going up to or beyond Mach 1. Even an extra 50 to 60 mph would at least be an inprovement. May not sound much but it would at least cut some time of those long PHX to LHD flights !!!

As another post mentioned, speeds have dropped, "727 are fairly quick compared to a lot of airliners out there"

 

[Skyboss]

I bet that if the A380 had a 'Built by Boeing' logo on it somewhere, reaction in various forums would be different.

Actually, I've personally thought any such aircraft for passenger service is a waste. I will never fly one of these because I'm not going to try and check in and board with 549 other people. 747's are bad enough, only made that flight once, never again.

 

[Hobit]

"I bet that if the A380 had a 'Built by Boeing' logo on it somewhere, reaction in various forums would be different."


If it was built by Boeing, it wouldn't look like the ugliest chick at the dance.

Then again, if the first time your country saw Boeing metal was in the early to mid 40's I can see where YOU'D be predisposed to talk poorly of their products.

 

[secks]

Questions from someone outside the biz: Isn't the A380 basically just the A340 with an upper deck slapped on? If so, what's the big fricken deal? Also, I can't imagine there is a huge market for this type of aircraft. Alright, so a few cargo and passenger airlines will buy it for their overseas operations .. is that really enough to make the A380 a financial success?

 

[bocefus]

Let me get this right.
This is the aircraft that Boeing said was "too big" and that "no airline would buy such a large aircraft". This is the same aircraft that got the orders it required to start production, the same aircraft that Boeing said no one would use.

Airbus required 0 orders to begin production, they receive "launch aid" which is only required to be paid back if the product line becomes profitable.

This is the same aircraft that made Boeing rethink their original statement about 'no airline would buy such a large aircraft' and made Boeing declare that it was going to extend the 747 by x feet and add y seats ( I forgot the stretch version number ) and after one year realized that no one wanted yet another stretch 747.

Actually it is Airbus who is taking this stance. They clearly stated that their market research indicated that a smaller, more efficient aircraft that is cheaper to operate and maintain is NOT what airlines wanted.
Once airlines started expressing great interest in the 787 and placing orders, Airbus unveils their plan for the A350, funny how similar to the 787 it is. Boeing never, ever said that they were going to produce an extended 74, it was merely being considered. The fact is, closing the entire 747 production line is under consideration.

 

[Weasil]

I am not talking about going up to or beyond Mach 1. Even an extra 50 to 60 mph would at least be an inprovement. May not sound much but it would at least cut some time of those long PHX to LHD flights !!!

As another post mentioned, speeds have dropped, "727 are fairly quick compared to a lot of airliners out there"

Dude, I refer you to the earlier replies. It gets expensive! That's why airplanes have gotten slower (as a general rule). See your aerodynamics textbook on highspeed flight.

 

[CF34-3B1]

Speeds have gone down for the same reason crew pay and customer service have gone down.


The average 190lb soccer mom wants to be able to log onto UnrealisticFares.Com and book her 5 screaming brats on a flight to see Granny or the Mouse for less than it costs to drive the minivan there.


She doesn't care if she's riding ExtendedChapter11 Airlines, she doesn't care if they got the engines overhauled in Bangladesh, because she's secure in her belief that the Government makes sure it's safe.


As Gordon Bethune once said "No one logs on to Priceline and says 'show me the 2nd cheapest fare.'"


Everything in aviation costs money, and with revenue streams heading in the wrong direction, we're not going to see any increases in speed for a long, long time.

 

[potrack]

Anyone who thinks there will not be a market for the A380 doesn't know how people live in Asia. They are all about the "cattle-car".

They run 777-300s and 747-400s all over this place in and out of their domestic airports! Imagine 8 747-400s FULL everyday between JFK and BOS! This is how they operate.

Ever seen how the Japanese pack into trains?

The A380 will pack them in in Asia.

It reminds me of when the AF first bought the C-17. Everybody called it "Budda". When I asked why, an AF guy told me, "Because it's big, fat, sits on the ground, and everybody worships it!"

 

[Hobit]

"It reminds me of when the AF first bought the C-17. Everybody called it "Budda". When I asked why, an AF guy told me, "Because it's big, fat, sits on the ground, and everybody worships it!""


Now that is funny!!!

 

[HPaul3]

"It reminds me of when the AF first bought the C-17. Everybody called it "Budda". When I asked why, an AF guy told me, "Because it's big, fat, sits on the ground, and everybody worships it!""


Now that is funny!!!

Of course, the other favorite nickname for the C-17 is "Barney," as in, Fred's little buddy.

(FRED = C-5, Freakin Ridiculous Economic Disaster)

 

[Freddie Spencer]

Boeing never, ever said that they were going to produce an extended 74, it was merely being considered. The fact is, closing the entire 747 production line is under consideration.

Boeing is eying a possible 2009 launch date for the 747 Advanced.
The company plans to decide by mid-year whether to build the
stretched plane. Officials have told reporters that carriers
are pressuring Boeing to make a decision as they look at their
long term fleet plans. Interested airlines include Cathay Pacific,
EVA Airways, Singapore Airlines, British Airways and Lufthansa

 

[bocefus]

What is your source? Where in this quote does Boeing state that they are doing anything other than considering an advance 74?
From Aviation Week, you can read and weep over the full text here;

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/02075wna.xml


"The past year has seen Boeing launch the 787 as the world's longest-range 200-300 seater. But the company also closed its 757 assembly line and said it will shut down 717 production in July 2006 if there is not an influx of orders. In both cases, Stonecipher said, the decision was made because the programs demonstrated no future. The same cloud now hangs over the 767 and 747.

Boeing and airlines have long talked about a 747 successor, but the company's answers never went as far as Airbus with its 555-seat A380, which is on the eve of flight testing. That's because Boeing's market forecasts are not nearly as optimistic for large transport sales as Airbus'. Still, some airline customers don't want Boeing to leave the very large airplane field even as the company's orders shift away from the 416-seat 747-400 to the 300-365-seat 777. "

"Should the 747 production line be closed, there will be a pool of more than 400 747-400s to draw from for conversion to dedicated freighters well into the future."

 

[cforst513]

when is the A380's maiden flight? i think i remember hearing it was sometime in march...

 

[msk2468]

by the way there is a show on the a380 tonight on tlc at 10pm, looks kind of interesting.

 

[414Flyer]

by the way there is a show on the a380 tonight on tlc at 10pm, looks kind of interesting.

Interesting for me to Poop on!

Sorry, had a triumph the dog moment.