Bavid Anonymous Dromage wrote in
:

matt weber writes:

On Tue, 13 May 2008 09:49:56 +1000, Sylvia Else
wrote:

Bavid Anonymous Dromage wrote:
Peter Fanelli writes:

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/gal...1631-5006020-5,
00.html

Wow, nothing exciting there in this fancy A380.
Just another cattle truck. So what's all the hype about?

With a much bigger carbon footprint that what's come before, so
it's doing nothing to address the problems of global environmental
degradation.


Lower per person.

Debatable. Fuel burn=sfc x totalweight/(l/d)

The problem with the A380 in the ultra long haul configuration is the
weight per passengers is pretty horrifying, even before it was
overweight.

Do the math.. 480 or so pax, EW=611000=1273 pounds per passengers

The reality is the 777-300ER has lower carbon emission per passenger
than the A380.
Sylvia.

I wonder if that will be something the airlines and governments who
love to see them use up fossil fuels will conveniently ignore this
fact... Hmmm


Count on it. When the Concorde started flying, the Frogs exempted it from
their noise regulations.