Author Topic: Airbus 'Superjumbo' Deliveries Delayed (Read 1752 times)

mora · « **Reply #30 on:** June 03, 2005, 10:19:52 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hangtime
Something 'wrong' with that attitude?

You're a friggin communist.

Hangtime · « **Reply #31 on:** June 03, 2005, 10:31:01 AM »

only in finland.

over here, what's mine stays mine. Over there, what's yours is theirs.

wave to the nice rooskies over the border for me... and play nice with the neighbors, dearie.

Saintaw · « **Reply #32 on:** June 03, 2005, 07:08:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hangtime
... half the white goods sitting around here have dubioius foriegn pedigrees.

I think the space shuttles are fitted with computer parts built in Belgium.

This is of course one of those moments where Wotan or Widewing comes back to you with a 279 pages manual that nobody but them ever gets arsed to read, but that proves you wrong... *tic tic tic*

Hangtime · « **Reply #33 on:** June 03, 2005, 07:12:13 PM »

explains why my commodore 64 is still faster than whats on the shuttle.

Wolfala · « **Reply #34 on:** June 03, 2005, 09:14:30 PM »

Interesting point - what is used on the shuttle these days?

Lizking · « **Reply #35 on:** June 03, 2005, 09:55:48 PM »

The shuttle started with a system called "Pyramid", but I don't know what is in there now. In early '80s Pyramid was ****-hot, though.

Dago · « **Reply #36 on:** June 04, 2005, 08:55:40 AM »

If the 380 is like the rest of the Airbus aircraft, it will not meet the performance figures originally promised by Airbus.

I think the 380 will be a failure in the long run. Another Concorde.

dago

beet1e · « **Reply #37 on:** June 04, 2005, 08:59:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dago
I think the 380 will be a failure in the long run. Another Concorde.

Doubtful. Apples and oranges. Concorde's destiny was set before it was deployed into service. Only 14 in active service, a one-way fare between London & New York of around $8000+, 26,000 litres of fuel an hour - I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did.

A380 will cater to an entirely different market.

Fishu · « **Reply #38 on:** June 04, 2005, 09:05:50 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dago
I think the 380 will be a failure in the long run. Another Concorde.

That comment indicates how little you know of the civilian aviation.

beet1e · « **Reply #39 on:** June 04, 2005, 09:07:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fishu
That comment indicates how little you know of the civilian aviation.

Yeah - the joke is that's his job. No wonder so many airlines go bankrupt.

Fishu · « **Reply #40 on:** June 04, 2005, 09:31:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
Yeah - the joke is that's his job. No wonder so many airlines go bankrupt.

I wouldn't believe it after his comments, because there isn't anything similar with A380 and Concorde's issues.
Such comments are only the result of bias or ignorance.

beet1e · « **Reply #41 on:** June 04, 2005, 09:36:11 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fishu
Such comments are only the result of bias or ignorance.

In his case, it's both.

Dago · « **Reply #42 on:** June 04, 2005, 09:52:27 AM »

The A380 future is yet to be decided, it could go either way as is the fact about any new aircraft introduction. My opinion is mine, and given with a fair amount of knowledge about the airline industry. A lot more than either of you clowns.

The Concorde was a failure. Commerically it never made money, always lost money. For an aircraft built specifically for the commericial airline industry, that is an unmitigated failure. Sure it flew, but so do other aircraft. Sure it was supersonic, but it was so freaking loud it wasn't allowed in many airports.

It lost money. Always. Very few were built or sold. It never recovered its cost of design and manufacture. That is a failure.

Now beetle, dont you have some women to physically assault in another drunken rage?

dago

beet1e · « **Reply #43 on:** June 04, 2005, 10:14:52 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dago
The Concorde was a failure. Commerically it never made money, always lost money. For an aircraft built specifically for the commericial airline industry, that is an unmitigated failure. Sure it flew, but so do other aircraft. Sure it was supersonic, but it was so freaking loud it wasn't allowed in many airports.

It lost money. Always. Very few were built or sold. It never recovered its cost of design and manufacture. That is a failure.

Well, we can agree on that. Which is why the comparison with A380 is so lopsided. Last time I looked, there were orders for 139 A380s - almost 10 for every Concorde, and that's before it even enters service. Concorde was a publicity stunt - seems the people holding the purse strings wanted Europe to develop a supersonic airliner before America did - not the best reasons I can think of.

A380 will be an entirely different kettle of fish, and will be used to remote destinations often 10,000km+ distant, and where there are few other destinations en route. It will also be the salvation of airports like LHR which are simply running out of runway slots.

LOL Dago - while we're trading insults, you keep on using the same two arrows in your quiver - this time both in the same sentence! Methinks you need some fresh material.

Dago · « **Reply #44 on:** June 04, 2005, 10:40:38 AM »

As I said, the story is yet to be told on the A380. It might succeed, it might not.

But, right now, can you tell me what airports that can handle it? Not too many.

What is the footprint weight at max gross ramp weight, and how many airports have the structural ability built into the runways, taxiways and ramps to hold it. (I assume they already considered it, but that might limit the airports)

How many airports have passenger waiting areas where 800 people can wait?

If a flight is canceled, what will be the cost of accomodating 800 people, and the impact on thier opinion of the airline?

How many jetbriges are required to load and unload 800 people? How long are the passengers willing to wait to unload when stopped at the gate?

What will be the required load factor necessary to break even or profit from a flight with that much fuel, food and cabin crew?

Assuming the aircraft will have LD3 capable cargo compartments, how much cargo weight can it carry and still retain a full cabin and fuel for a flight of distance? (a big question that one, that will have a direct and huge effect on cost/profit)

God forbid an accident, but if one ever crashed, what would be the political and commercial impact, and how much negative publicity would accompany that? (think the Comet)

I am trying to just touch on a few of the many factors to consider beyond "it's really big and cool".

BTW, if you tire of the insults, you need to stop throwing them. But in case, just to please you, I will find some additional assault related graphics to have on hand.

dago