Air Canada chooses Boeing 777s, 787s

[NUKE]

By July, 1970, the 747 had carried over 1 million passengers....and in 2005, the Airbus 380 has not even flown one flight.

[NUKE]

Originally posted by mora
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 around 350.

 

at the moment, the 380 has taken ZERO passengers and in fact has never even flown.

[Staga]

Why so bitter? Someone from Airbus pee'd on your cereals?

[wipass]

loosen up nuke,

Time to worry is when Oil is bought in Euros

wipass

[Yeager2]

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.

 And,... The first time... JUST ONE,... that crashes ( if ever ),.. it will be like losing an entire TOWN of people in one quick death blow.

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.

Well, they are trying to indeed make the same change to aviation that a large plane like the 747 did.

The "correct" direction that we should be heading is for faster, and more efficent possible (semi orbital ) configurations that would enable quicker travel. ( in my opinion of course )

The A380 looks really good, but,... mostly completely unneeded.

By the way,,.. How many 747's do you even see "FILLED" to the max regularly?  I have been in quite a few, and... well.   They ALL have had plenty of seating available. I think that in oder to fill the seats of this new plane, the demand sure needs to increase in someway.

[Fishu]

Originally posted by Yeager2
[BBy the way,,.. How many 747's do you even see "FILLED" to the max regularly?  I have been in quite a few, and... well.   They ALL have had plenty of seating available. I think that in oder to fill the seats of this new plane, the demand sure needs to increase in someway.
[/B]

I've heard they make more money with the cargo than with the onboard passengers.
This does also seem to be one criteria for the airliners when they choose an aircraft; how much cargo it can carry with the passengers.

[indy007]

Kinda suprised nobody has brought up freight companies like FedEx. They have large commercial jet fleets. They are always going fill their fleet with whatever moves the largest quanitity if pure cargo, the farthest, the fastest, for the cheapest. Whether it's 777s, 787s, or A380 cargo variants.. well, time will tell. I'd imagine as they retire 747s they'll move to 777s or 787s to combat rising fuel prices.

[Gh0stFT]

Originally posted by Yeager2
... mostly completely unneeded.

I disagree here, if it makes the ticket price drop i think
its an good idea.

[Momus--]

Originally posted by Yeager2
By the way,,.. How many 747's do you even see "FILLED" to the max regularly?

Take just about any BA flight to the Carribbean between November and April and they're full to the rafters in my experience.

[Staga]

Originally posted by indy007
Kinda suprised nobody has brought up freight companies like FedEx. They have large commercial jet fleets. They are always going fill their fleet with whatever moves the largest quanitity if pure cargo, the farthest, the fastest, for the cheapest. Whether it's 777s, 787s, or A380 cargo variants.. well, time will tell. I'd imagine as they retire 747s they'll move to 777s or 787s to combat rising fuel prices.

FedEx already made its move.

AIRBUS 380: FEDEX COUNTING THE DAYS TO A380F DELIVERY
   
/noticias.info/ For Fred W. Smith, the delivery of the first A380 Freighter in 2008 can’t come soon enough.

The Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Federal Express, who was attending the A380 Reveal ceremony today, said the A380 was the perfect solution to FedEx’s business needs.

"2008 can’t come quickly enough for us," said Mr Smith. "The aircraft is pretty close to perfect.

"In terms of state-of-the-art for our particular operation, the A380 is near perfection because it solves a number of issues for us. It gives us a lot more cubic space, a lot more payload and a lot more range, but it also sits in almost the same parking dimension as our largest aircraft today and only utilises one slot. That’s a great advantage."

FedEx will be the first operator to take delivery of the A380-800F, the all-cargo version, in 2008. The operator has 10 firm orders for the aircraft, plus options on 10 more.

Boasting 40,000 cubic feet, the A380F is capable of carrying a freight load of 150 tonnes over about 6,000 nautical miles (10,400 kilometres) offering an advantage over competitor freighters. For FedEx, the A380F will play a vital role in connecting the North American and Asian markets and meeting the company’s future growth requirements.

"It allows us to grow without having to grow the infrastructure proportionately," said Mr Smith.

And congratulating Airbus on its achievement today, he added: "The A380 is an engineering marvel. Since it went into the business in the seventies, Airbus has been a leader and has now built the first triple-decker freighter. Airbus is a very innovative company that makes good aircraft, helping its customers fly them reliably and profitably There not much more you can ask from a supplier than that.

"We’re anxious to see the A380 out in the network. We wish we had the A380 today."

[Fishu]

Originally posted by indy007
Kinda suprised nobody has brought up freight companies like FedEx. They have large commercial jet fleets. They are always going fill their fleet with whatever moves the largest quanitity if pure cargo, the farthest, the fastest, for the cheapest. Whether it's 777s, 787s, or A380 cargo variants.. well, time will tell. I'd imagine as they retire 747s they'll move to 777s or 787s to combat rising fuel prices.

FedEx has ordered a nice bunch of A380's.
They got their logo on the side of the first A380: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/825110/L/

Apparently UPS is also in the list.

[Staga]

Fishu is getting slow...

[Habu]

I don't like travelling in really big planes. At one time all I cared about was fare but now I am sick of being treated like a cow in the back of a truck when I go overseas.

Big planes mean big waits for your bags, poor service as there are so many people to feed. The more people in a cabin the more chance you end up with really annoying people who get up every 10 minutes to ask for a drink or go to the bathroom. Seat dimensions and leg room are also very important. Seems that legroom was not a priority in the airbus specs.

Also if a big plane has to go from hub to hub and you are going to a different city your overall travel time can be much longer than taking a smaller plane direct to you destination. For instance I may not want to stop in Singapore every time I go to Indonesia or Malaysia.

I think Boeing has it right. The days of mega planes are over. Europe is just following a business plan that made sense 15 years ago but does not make sense now. (Except for some cargo haulers).

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by Habu


I think Boeing has it right. The days of mega planes are over. Europe is just following a business plan that made sense 15 years ago but does not make sense now. (Except for some cargo haulers).

Yes, volume is so 90's. Massproduction and huge capacity is worth nothing these days. Just look at tankers and cargoships, they seem to get smaller every year

[Habu]

Moving people and moving commodities is not the same thing, except in the minds of a French burocrat perhaps.

In air travel your cargo decides what airline and airplane and route it wants to travel on. And it pays for the ride.

Oil and containers do not care what they ride in.

An airline may want you to travel  with 1000 other people in a small tube with recirculated air but that does not mean the concept will be successful.