Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Has anyone seen these two planes? They are stunning, and I don't even like to fly. The Airbus, IMO, looks a bit too large though for my tastes as it can carry a whopping 800 passengers.
Each seems to be coming from a different point of view.
Sleek and fast vs gigantic and stately.
I actually am kind of excited about both of them.
I once got to sit inside a fake Concord cockpit and got excited about that, too.
Location: The Raider Nation._ Our band kicks brass
1,853 posts, read 9,660,673 times
Reputation: 2341
Comparing a 787 to an A380 is like comparing an eighteen wheeler to a pickup truck. The A380 would have been a great long haul cargo plane, but FedEx and UPS both cancelled their orders. Airbus says 800 passengers. These days you have a hard time finding 150 people that all want to go to the same place at the same time. I can see Japan, and maybe China stuffing that many people in at once, but not too many other countries. I know that I wouldn't want to be humping 800 seats out of an A380 during a heavy check. Especially the ones that convert to full beds. The first class seats are heavy enough for me. I'm getting too old for that crap.
Both look very nice but Airbus has shot itself in the foot with the A380. The problems they're having with the wiring has pushed back the delivery dates back which has upset many of it's customers. Besides the sheer size will prevent many US airports to handle a craft like the A380 while just about all can accomodate the 787 Dreamliner. My vote is for Boeing.
Honestly, as a student the only thing I care about when flying is the price, and maybe that I get a window seat. You could stow me away in the luggage compartment or have me help out the flight attendants if it was cheaper to do that. Even long flights are short in the grand scheme of things.
Besides the sheer size will prevent many US airports to handle a craft like the A380 while just about all can accomodate the 787 Dreamliner.
The A380 just delivered it's 142nd aircraft to Qatar (12th airline). They are flying to 43 airports now.
The Dreamliner just delivered it's 187nd aircraft to Kenya Airlines. That is 23 airlines, and flying to well over 200 airports around the world. Roughly 20% of the aircraft are creating new routes, while 80% of the aircraft are replacing older aircraft.
Boeing is trying to produce 100-120 Dreamliners per year, while Airbus is building 25 A380's per year.
But the Dreamliner is called the "hub-buster", while the A380 is designed to service hubs. Certainly no one ever thought the A380 would ever fly to more than 80 airports in it's existence.
The only major long haul airports in the USA that could be covered by the A380
Chicago (ORD)
Honolulu (HNL)
Boston (BOS)
Newark (EWR)
Airbus doesn't really need more airports to make the A380 a success, just more routes.
(SQ) Singapore (SIN) Los Angeles (LAX) via Tokyo (NRT)
(EK) Dubai (DXB) Los Angeles (LAX)
(AF) Paris (CDG) Los Angeles (LAX)
(QF) Melbourne (MEL) Los Angeles (LAX)
(QF) Sydney (SYD) Los Angeles (LAX)
(KE) Seoul (ICN) Los Angeles (LAX)
(CZ) Guangzhou (CAN) Los Angeles (LAX)
(BA) London (LHR) Los Angeles (LAX)
(OZ) Seoul (ICN) Los Angeles (LAX)
.
(SQ) Singapore (SIN)New York (JFK) via Frankfurt (FRA)
(EK) Dubai (DXB) New York (JFK)
(LH) Frankfurt (FRA) New York (JFK)
(AF) Paris (CDG) New York (JFK)
(KE) Seoul (ICN) New York (JFK)
.
(LH) Frankfurt (FRA) San Francisco (SFO)
(AF) Paris (CDG) San Francisco (SFO)
(AF) Paris (CDG) Washington (IAD)
(KE) Seoul (ICN) Atlanta (ATL)
(LH) Frankfurt (FRA) Miami (MIA)
(EK) Dubai (DXB) Toronto (YYZ)
(LH) Frankfurt (FRA) Houston (IAH)
(QF) Sydney (SYD) Dallas (DFW)
Last edited by PacoMartin; 09-25-2014 at 10:42 AM..
Comparing a 787 to an A380 is like comparing an eighteen wheeler to a pickup truck. The A380 would have been a great long haul cargo plane, but FedEx and UPS both cancelled their orders. Airbus says 800 passengers. These days you have a hard time finding 150 people that all want to go to the same place at the same time. I can see Japan, and maybe China stuffing that many people in at once, but not too many other countries. I know that I wouldn't want to be humping 800 seats out of an A380 during a heavy check. Especially the ones that convert to full beds. The first class seats are heavy enough for me. I'm getting too old for that crap.
I see these bodies as being very useful for the peak load routes--LHR/JFK; LHR/DXB; LHR/LAX; LHR/SIN; CDG/JFK; LHR/EWR; etc.
As to the beds being too heavy, sorry, but that's your job and if you don't like it, you need to find another. I almost always book a lay flat on a TA/TP and that's not going to change because someone in maintenance doesn't like it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
