Airbus A 380 is rolling

Jay Beckman wrote:


Thought I read somewhere that Emirates Air already wants to rasie the

capacity of the A380...round about 800 pax, IIRC.

Good grief! Now you'll have to get to the airport 4 hrs. early. Can
you imagine how long it would take to check in and board 800 people and
their luggage?

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

Not to mention the cost of paying for 800 deaths when the tail falls off the
thing...

"John Galban" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jay Beckman wrote:


Thought I read somewhere that Emirates Air already wants to rasie the

capacity of the A380...round about 800 pax, IIRC.

Good grief! Now you'll have to get to the airport 4 hrs. early. Can
you imagine how long it would take to check in and board 800 people and
their luggage?

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

"John Galban" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jay Beckman wrote:


Thought I read somewhere that Emirates Air already wants to rasie the

capacity of the A380...round about 800 pax, IIRC.

Good grief! Now you'll have to get to the airport 4 hrs. early. Can
you imagine how long it would take to check in and board 800 people and
their luggage?

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)


Forget check-in and luggage... Can you imagine Custom lines if a couple of
these suckers land at the same time?

John,

Good grief! Now you'll have to get to the airport 4 hrs. early. Can
you imagine how long it would take to check in and board 800 people and
their luggage?


This is so funny. It reads like what one read in the trade magazines of
the late 60s about the 747. Exactly, almost word for word. Look at us
today: Does anyone think anything about boarding a 747 flight?

Ah, human nature and innovation...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 19:32:50 +0100, "Chris"
wrote:

The A380 is not meant to go anywhere. Its prime route will be Europe to the
Emirates and Asia. The 7E7 is more of a low density traffic plane. I suspect
that the A380 will be delivering their vast numbers into airports where the
7E7 and the like can scurry around taking the passengers to their final
destinations.

It's not a bad division of labor.

Airbus would be smart to quietly drop its 787 killer, just as Boeing
quietly dropped its 380 killer.

It's been about 25 years since I've flown (in) a 747. I don't ever
expect to fly a 380. No thanks! Since the airlines started to fill the
middle seats, commercial air travel has become hard labor, and I will
always pick the 250-seat plane over the 400-seat plane.

The worst thing that could happen to air travel is for either Airbus
or Boeing to go on the rocks. The present situation, where each is
concentrating on its own style of air travel (the bus vs. the limo) is
ideal.



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

Cub Driver wrote:
Airbus would be smart to quietly drop its 787 killer, just as Boeing
quietly dropped its 380 killer.

Are you referring to the 747X that no-one bought or the almost-supersonic
plane that Boeing engineering couldn't live up to Boeing marketing promises?

Hilton

New Boeing 7E7 is more fuel efficient than the A380

OK, here's my question. Aircraft manufacturers will do just about anything
to get 1% fuel savings. Boeing says the 787 will be 20% more efficient -
HOW? And why is everyone OK with it? I'm just curious, I'm not doubting
their claims, but sometimes if things sound too good to be true...

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/background.html

Thanks,

Hilton

Hilton wrote:

New Boeing 7E7 is more fuel efficient than the A380


OK, here's my question. Aircraft manufacturers will do just about anything
to get 1% fuel savings. Boeing says the 787 will be 20% more efficient -
HOW? And why is everyone OK with it? I'm just curious, I'm not doubting
their claims, but sometimes if things sound too good to be true...

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/background.html

Thanks,

Hilton


Hilton,

There's lies, damn lies, and statistics. Besides, Boeing says:
"The airplane will use 20 percent less fuel for comparable missions than
any similarly sized airplane."
Not exactly an apples to apples comparison with the 380.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane

Scott Skylane wrote:
Hilton wrote:

New Boeing 7E7 is more fuel efficient than the A380


OK, here's my question. Aircraft manufacturers will do just about
anything
to get 1% fuel savings. Boeing says the 787 will be 20% more
efficient -
HOW? And why is everyone OK with it? I'm just curious, I'm not
doubting
their claims, but sometimes if things sound too good to be true...

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/background.html

Thanks,

Hilton


Hilton,

There's lies, damn lies, and statistics. Besides, Boeing says:
"The airplane will use 20 percent less fuel for comparable missions than
any similarly sized airplane."
Not exactly an apples to apples comparison with the 380.

I never mentioned the A380 - I'm just curious how Boeing has reduced the
fuel consumption by a staggering 20% for a similarly sized airplane.

Hilton

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 07:12:44 GMT, "Hilton"
wrote:

OK, here's my question. Aircraft manufacturers will do just about anything
to get 1% fuel savings. Boeing says the 787 will be 20% more efficient -
HOW? And why is everyone OK with it? I'm just curious, I'm not doubting
their claims, but sometimes if things sound too good to be true...

One assumes they're saying 20 percent more efficient than the 777, and
that it's accomplished by cutting weight, streamlining design, and
buying better engines.

The engines of course are fungible. Airbus proposes to use them on its
787 killer (which will probably never get off the ground).


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com