Author Topic: Air Canada chooses Boeing 777s, 787s (Read 1194 times)

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #15 on:** April 25, 2005, 05:49:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fishu
All of 'em flies, I want to fly 'em all

Boeing 777, 787 is a different market target then our A380.
Its just bussiness, and a good deal for Boeing...

and btw. our A380 still never lift off

Tomorrow is THE DAY! I hope he flies LOL

Gixer · « **Reply #16 on:** April 25, 2005, 05:52:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mora
I wonder what happens if the 787 doesn't meet it's ambitious performance specifications? Another MD-11?

Another MD-11? What's wrong with the MD-11? I've seen the odd frighter version landing at NZAA while flying and I've always thought it was an excellent aircraft.

As for the A-380 then I wish Airbus all the best with it but I think the B777 v A380 arguments aren't really relevent as they are two completely different aircraft. Though it will be interesting to see over time which the public and airlines prefer.

~~...-Gixer~~

Yeager · « **Reply #17 on:** April 25, 2005, 06:08:30 PM »

Shhhh...GSholz thinks Boeing is from Asia
====
a good chunk of the 787 will be

Bodhi · « **Reply #18 on:** April 25, 2005, 06:44:12 PM »

Airport redesign costs alone make the A380 a limited use aircraft to begin with, as most airports are not going to be able to handle an aircraft of that size in a timely manner.

As for no direct competitor??? Thats BS, it's marginally bigger than the 747, which means they are competitors. As for the 747, I do not see it being phased out any time soon by the A380.

Krusher · « **Reply #19 on:** April 25, 2005, 06:45:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bodhi
Airport redesign costs alone make the A380 a limited use aircraft to begin with, as most airports are not going to be able to handle an aircraft of that size in a timely manner.

As for no direct competitor??? Thats BS, it's marginally bigger than the 747, which means they are competitors. As for the 747, I do not see it being phased out any time soon by the A380.

I am not an expert, but isnt boeing talking about a redesigned 747 that is marginaly more efficient?

Bodhi · « **Reply #20 on:** April 25, 2005, 06:47:59 PM »

I have not seen it, I have seen the 777 test a/c out here at COS and it's been here alot the last few weeks, aparently testing some newer engine setups. Much quieter than before, and thats quiet.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #21 on:** April 25, 2005, 08:59:45 PM »

Norwegians should root agianst A380 anyway, it's supposed to use much less fuel than B747 and that's not good business for your gang of arctic arabs...

Cobra412 · « **Reply #22 on:** April 26, 2005, 01:21:09 AM »

We had the 777 out there doing a bunch of tests last year. I must say it's very impressive. Never seen such a big aircraft get airborne that quickly or stop as quickly as it did. Kind of nice being at the flight test center. Since you get to see commercial tests and military tests going on.

-tronski- · « **Reply #23 on:** April 26, 2005, 02:35:18 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bodhi
Airport redesign costs alone make the A380 a limited use aircraft to begin with, as most airports are not going to be able to handle an aircraft of that size in a timely manner.

As for no direct competitor??? Thats BS, it's marginally bigger than the 747, which means they are competitors. As for the 747, I do not see it being phased out any time soon by the A380.

Major international airports should already be well into their A380 upgrade works...

Tronsky

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #24 on:** April 26, 2005, 02:35:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bodhi
As for no direct competitor??? Thats BS, it's marginally bigger than the 747, which means they are competitors.

The A380 will load up to 853 passangers, i dont call this marginally.

NUKE · « **Reply #25 on:** April 26, 2005, 02:40:18 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gh0stFT
The A380 will load up to 853 passangers, i dont call this marginally.

better read some more....it's not gonna be hauling anything close to that number.

Let's see if it can even fly first

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #26 on:** April 26, 2005, 02:50:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
Let's see if it can even fly first

as i said ealier, tomorrow is the first flight planed, i really hope
for the best! My girlfriends brother was working/testing on the A380 flaps & slaps,
he is praying too

NUKE · « **Reply #27 on:** April 26, 2005, 03:04:19 AM »

The 747 has been operational for how many years? The 380 has never even flown.

If Airbus, with their 380 (in 2005) is hoping to compete with a 36 year old 747, then I think they are setting their goals pretty low.

mora · « **Reply #28 on:** April 26, 2005, 03:09:04 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gixer
Another MD-11? What's wrong with the MD-11? I've seen the odd frighter version landing at NZAA while flying and I've always thought it was an excellent aircraft.

Nothing wrong with it really but it didn't initially meets it's specifications and lost a lot of orders because of that. The line was shut down early and the company died. Who's hauling passengers with them these days? Finnair and Varig comes to mind but no one else. I've heard it's a great plane for Finnair because it can haul a **** load of cargo, but if you don't have that option it's not very economical plane.

mora · « **Reply #29 on:** April 26, 2005, 03:12:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
better read some more....it's not gonna be hauling anything close to that number.

Let's see if it can even fly first

Yes it will. Out of memory the A380-800 will be hauling around 800 eventually and the A380-900 around 1000. At the moment it takes 550 in a very low density 3 class configuration. A 747 with a similar configuration and seat pitch will take less than 400.

At the current configuration it's around 20% more economical in fuel consumption per passenger.