The behemoth is due to fly tomorrow

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by GScholz
You really think they'll use an A380 for the "spoke" flights?

hub to hub obviously.

Which means when flying fom Pittsburgh US to Orleans FR, you can fly one leg on a 787 or fly a 737 to Newark, 380 to Paris, then a 319 to Orleans.  Three airplanes, three landings, three times the amount of hugely expensive beer and stale pizza eaten at the airport, three times the probablility that your baggage ends up in Bangkok.

[Nilsen]

Some times i wish i was luggage.
Think about all the strange and far-away places you get to see. You don't get to spend as much time with your owner as say a chair or a spoon would either.

[Holden McGroin]

I'm not saying that the 380 is a bad idea. It is as clearly thought out as any business proposal including the 787.

The business forecast that Boeing used says the market for an efficient midsize is better than an efficient hugesize.

With them selling fewer 747-400's  and many more 777's in the last decade to Asia told them that people prefer to fly in smaller more convenient flights rather than the travelling model Airbus' used.

The 380 will sell, but whether it, or indeed the 787 will sell enough to payback the investment is up to the market.

[straffo]

Originally posted by GScholz
Sure, but that requires there are enough people that want to travel from Pittsburgh to Orleans to make the flight profitable.

You should not forget to add "New" in front or Orléans or it will be a transatlantic flight ...

Plus what the Hell (Helvet ) would someone from Pittsburgh go to Orléans or vice versa ?
It's certainly the most uninterresting places in our countries.

[Hangtime]

Originally posted by Chairboy

This conversation has descended from fighting to complete nonsense

 

My work here is complete.

[Toad]

Airbus has merely provided a tool.

It will be up to the marketing departments of the world's airlines to make this tool a success.

Either they will find a way to use it profitably or not. That is really the only question here.

[straffo]

Yep just noticed Holden post were is precised Orléans "FR".

IMO the smartest way to got from Pittsburg to Orléans would be :
A380 to Paris then 20 in a cab and finally 1 hour train.

[Holden McGroin]

Sorry Straffo, the 380 will most assuredly not fly into Pittsburgh.

And if I do go to 'Old' Orleans, I'm gonna fly not take the friggin train...  unless maybe the TGV goes to Orleans.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by GScholz
In Asia they'll even use the A380 as a local commuter plane.

I was surprised to find that Singapore Airlines used their 747-400 aircraft to make the 1-hour hop from Singapore to Jakarta. I was expecting something smaller, but as SIA has only about 6 destinations within 1000 miles of Singapore, I guess it's not worth having a fleet of tiddlers.

Oh, and on the Monday morning I made that flight, every last seat was filled. My first trip across the equator.

A380 in Pittsburgh?

[straffo]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Sorry Straffo, the 380 will most assuredly not fly into Pittsburgh.

And if I do go to 'Old' Orleans, I'm gonna fly not take the friggin train...  unless maybe the TGV goes to Orleans.

It goes

But don't forget France is a lot smaller than the USA plus our railway system is not comparable to yours.

IMO using airplane to got from Paris to Orlean would be a waste of time.

[Staga]

Nice to see Americans are so worried about Airbus' future

Errr... maybe You're more afraid what will happen to Boeing?

[GtoRA2]

Blah blah blah, I hate america, blah blah blah, lack of sunlight has driven me insane.

[Habu]

Originally posted by CMC Airboss
The statement  from Habu is that YOU would have to land three times, not the A380.  To take an A380, you have to fly from a hub. To get to or from the hub, you have to fly a different airplane on the spoke.  Each landing incurs fees regardless of the airplane type.  Incidentally, you are paying for these costs with your ticket purchase and surcharge fees.  

MiG

How about I explain it a simpler way. You purchase a ticket on the airline flying the A380. It flys that plane from New York to London. You live in Chicago and want to go to Munich. That airline has to get you a flight from Chicago to New York first. Pay the crew fuel landing fees airplane cost etc for that seat. You are probably on a smaller less efficient plane. But the airline is incuring lots of costs for those seat miles.

Now you get on the super efficient Airbus and fly to London and that airline has incurred a very expensive landing fee as major hubs cost more to land at, then it has to fly you out of London (another major landing fee to get that plane into London) to Munich. Now the two feeder planes may be smaller but the airline has to pay the costs to get those seats from Chicago to New York and from  London to Munich. It costs much more to land at an airport and take off and continue to a destination than it does to overfly it and go to the same destination.

You have baggage handleing costs, infastructure costs, staff costs etc.

Now the Boeing airline loads up once in Chicago and then flys direct to Munich.

You tell me what will cost less per seat mile.

[bunch]

when do i get to buy a cheap used 747?  I saw one for sale a few months ago for only a million, but it needed work

[spitfiremkv]

I think we're missing the point here: the A380 is the largest civil airliner.Aside for the AN225, but how many of those are flying?!?!?
the A380 is a radical improvement over all current airlines.
Boein's latest model, the 787, although it has inovative features, is not the biggest, nor the fastest, nor the longest range airliner. It is touted as "20%" more efficient than comparable airlines , but that's pretty vague.
And...it hasn't flown yet.
The A380 is a historic plane marking a new era in transportation. Can you say the same thing about the 787?

I believe the lead in commercial aircraft design has been taken by Airbus.