[GregTheStig]

Originally Posted by vioaltec

Its more like entrusting your life on a safe airline than the aircraft. For me, i will NEVER step foot on a China airlines, i will always try to fly with Singapore Airlines, not because of their great service but because of their safety record and strict maintenance program.

That too. The only Airbuses I've flown on were with British Air. The plane was late because of maintenance problems and the flaps on the right wing looked like they were hanging off a thread. I should probably broaden my horizons a bit and trust Airbus more but that 1 experience was enough for me

[jpsum]

Originally Posted by GregTheStig

That too. The only Airbuses I've flown on were with British Air. The plane was late because of maintenance problems and the flaps on the right wing looked like they were hanging off a thread. I should probably broaden my horizons a bit and trust Airbus more but that 1 experience was enough for me

One more post and you'll hit 1000

[GregTheStig]

Originally Posted by jpsum

One more post and you'll hit 1000

wut?

[jpsum]

Originally Posted by GregTheStig

wut?

still says 999.

[infinitekidM2C]

off-topic don't count...u know this mannnnn

[GregTheStig]

Originally Posted by jpsum

still says 999.

Laaaaag. It'll get there eventually.

[jpsum]

Originally Posted by infinitekid2002

off-topic don't count...u know this mannnnn

is that new? Most of my posts are in OT.

[vioaltec]

Originally Posted by jpsum

Correct. But this is something I completely don't understand. Most, if not all, of these international airlines have 747s in their fleet. The 800 shares many components with its smaller counterpart. For maintenance, it would only make sense to go with the 747 again to keep the fleet simple (~think jetblue, although they screwed up by adding Embraer to its fleet). The A380 only has about 50 more seats than the 800. I think there is more to this than capacity.

Its all about the business market, the airlines yield network system and what aircraft to put on that route. Another thing is the price. Airbus are giving out great a380 deals to airlines compared to Boeing, $140 million per frame, which in a way screws up the CASM/RASM in favor of the a380-800 over the 747-8i. Certain airlines requires larger aircrafts and seat capacity to fill the yield of a specific route, basically why send 2 747's with a 3 class configuaration to the same destination when you can send 1 a380? The passenger per seat and seat per range also plays in favor of the a380 over the 747. For example, Singapore Airlines which was the launched customer of the a380 in the 2007 is completely pleased with the a380's performance (capacity and range)over its fleet of 747's (Mind you, Singapore Airlines was once the largest 747 operator in the world). According to their numbers, they predict that the a380 and future a380-900 will surpass the 747-8i. it may be a little to late for Boeing. And the war between the two isnt over yet, the new a350 is set to be the next rival to Boeings 787.

[infinitekidM2C]

Originally Posted by jpsum

is that new? Most of my posts are in OT.

check ur post count in this thread...hey so are mine that's why my post count is relatively low for how long ive been a part of this..."community"

[Quick6EF]

More pics of airplanes

[jpsum]

Originally Posted by vioaltec

Its all about the business market, the airlines yield network system and what aircraft to put on that route. Another thing is the price. Airbus are giving out great a380 deals to airlines compared to Boeing, $140 million per frame, which in a way screws up the CASM/RASM in favor of the a380-800 over the 747-8i. Certain airlines requires larger aircrafts and seat capacity to fill the yield of a specific route, basically why send 2 747's with a 3 class configuaration to the same destination when you can send 1 a380? The passenger per seat and seat per range also plays in favor of the a380 over the 747. For example, Singapore Airlines which was the launched customer of the a380 in the 2007 is completely pleased with the a380's performance (capacity and range)over its fleet of 747's (Mind you, Singapore Airlines was once the largest 747 operator in the world). According to their numbers, they predict that the a380 and future a380-900 will surpass the 747-8i. it may be a little to late for Boeing. And the war between the two isnt over yet, the new a350 is set to be the next rival to Boeings 787.

maybe it's the business that I'm in, I just can't stand these big planes. Airport planning and design is a nightmare when it comes to the A380. We can't build a claim hall big enough for a single baggage carousel that would fit all bags from a single A380 flight, or provide enough pax presentation space around the claim device. A380 flight arrives on two carousels which is a logistics cluster fvck. And for the agents, it's definitely not fun to rebook and reroute everyone on a A380 all at once.

[vioaltec]

Originally Posted by jpsum

maybe it's the business that I'm in, I just can't stand these big planes. Airport planning and design is a nightmare when it comes to the A380. We can't build a claim hall big enough for a single baggage carousel that would fit all bags from a single A380 flight, or provide enough pax presentation space around the claim device. A380 flight arrives on two carousels which is a logistics cluster fvck. And for the agents, it's definitely not fun to rebook and reroute everyone on a A380 all at once.

lol, agree. the a380 is good for the big guys but the little people who serve on it or for it ends up taking the brunt of it. i spoked to a singapore girl on my hong kong flight and she said that she dreads working the a380 because of its high passenger capacity. (i think im obsessed with Singapore Airlines because i keep talking about them lol). Singapore airlines has the highest crew per passenger ratio in the industry 1 flight attendant per every 25 passengers. However, on the a380 its different, its 1 crew for every 28 passengrs. 17 crew members = 476 passengers, excluding suites paying passengers.

[XYR03]

It'll buff out

[DougLikesBMW]

Originally Posted by jpsum

the 47 is still a better looking aircraft.

[IMG]http://i.cdn.cnngo.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/article_large/2011/02/14/boeing_747-8_main_image.jpg[IMG]

This is the new 747-8.

that thing is sexy

[Echo M3]

Originally Posted by vioaltec

The A380 is a beast of an aircraft, i want to be able to fly her one day

It's great. I flew New York-Dubai on Emirates, they have a bar (with bartender and couches) upstairs, as well as showers for those lucky first class travelers.

The whole plane is so efficient that you really feel like you are traveling on a smaller plane. Because the jetways link to both decks, boarding is very quick. The multi-colored lighting is also really cool, complete with dimming LEDs in the ceiling to simulate sunrise/sunset/celestial bodies while you're sleeping. Overall, was a great experience.

[Blake]

Originally Posted by vioaltec

Its all about the business market, the airlines yield network system and what aircraft to put on that route. Another thing is the price. Airbus are giving out great a380 deals to airlines compared to Boeing, $140 million per frame, which in a way screws up the CASM/RASM in favor of the a380-800 over the 747-8i. Certain airlines requires larger aircrafts and seat capacity to fill the yield of a specific route, basically why send 2 747's with a 3 class configuaration to the same destination when you can send 1 a380? The passenger per seat and seat per range also plays in favor of the a380 over the 747. For example, Singapore Airlines which was the launched customer of the a380 in the 2007 is completely pleased with the a380's performance (capacity and range)over its fleet of 747's (Mind you, Singapore Airlines was once the largest 747 operator in the world). According to their numbers, they predict that the a380 and future a380-900 will surpass the 747-8i. it may be a little to late for Boeing. And the war between the two isnt over yet, the new a350 is set to be the next rival to Boeings 787.

well i think SQ is the best example of the a380's worthiness. that and maybe QF, too. SQ's routes are almost all longhaul route. QF uses the a380 on it's longest haul routes, as well. all of those routes are ~7000SM, where it would make business sense to carry as many pax as possible. now, filling those seats is something entirely different. i don't know about SQ, but QF has had trouble selling out a380 flights. now, when the 787 becomes a reality, i think the a380 is going to become even more of a novelty.

conversely, i think as long as they continue to mfg 747's without serious design changes and the need for different parts, the 747 will continue to be the airline's weapon of choice in the long haul/medium haul market, especially in freight as the MD-11F gets phased out.

i suppose my point is, besides being a diehard boeing fan, i think the a380 misses the mark in a lot of categories. a 747 can fly anywhere, while the a380 can't. this particular accident is just another reason i can think of for saying 'when is big too big?'

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by Blake

well i think SQ is the best example of the a380's worthiness. that and maybe QF, too. SQ's routes are almost all longhaul route. QF uses the a380 on it's longest haul routes, as well. all of those routes are ~7000SM, where it would make business sense to carry as many pax as possible. now, filling those seats is something entirely different. i don't know about SQ, but QF has had trouble selling out a380 flights. now, when the 787 becomes a reality, i think the a380 is going to become even more of a novelty.

conversely, i think as long as they continue to mfg 747's without serious design changes and the need for different parts, the 747 will continue to be the airline's weapon of choice in the long haul/medium haul market, especially in freight as the MD-11F gets phased out.

i suppose my point is, besides being a diehard boeing fan, i think the a380 misses the mark in a lot of categories. a 747 can fly anywhere, while the a380 can't. this particular accident is just another reason i can think of for saying 'when is big too big?'

most airlines (e.g. CX) are hesitant to get the 380 because of the payload and range, they much prefer the 773ER at the moment to replace aging 744....if development on the 380-900 have much better payload and range, could be a star....

anywayz...imagine the passengers on the CRJ is standing up (even tho they shouldn't) and grabbing their hand-carries (which most Chinese passengers do always!)....they could get seriously injured!!!

the force on the CRJ is like the worse wake turbulence....

[vioaltec]

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

most airlines (e.g. CX) are hesitant to get the 380 because of the payload and range, they much prefer the 773ER at the moment to replace aging 744....if development on the 380-900 have much better payload and range, could be a star....

anywayz...imagine the passengers on the CRJ is standing up (even tho they shouldn't) and grabbing their hand-carries (which most Chinese passengers do always!)....they could get seriously injured!!!

the force on the CRJ is like the worse wake turbulence....

Correct, Cathay Pacific is at the moment the only airline PUSHING for the a380-900. CX wants to get rid of their a340-600 and 747-400 in favor of the 777W. However, if Airbus is willing to build the a380, CX said that they are willing to shed some of their 777W orders off from Boeing.

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by vioaltec

Correct, Cathay Pacific is at the moment the only airline PUSHING for the a380-900. CX wants to get rid of their a340-600 and 747-400 in favor of the 777W. However, if Airbus is willing to build the a380, CX said that they are willing to shed some of their 777W orders off from Boeing.

Given they already got rid of the A346 and taking more and more delivery of the 773ER....in routes like HKG-LAX, they replaced with all 773ER which gives them more flexibility in terms of range and cargo load.

It also capable of ultra long range routes like HKG-JFK, plus CX had plenty of 777-300 pilots ready for many years. It was a sensible and conservative (safe business practice) decision.

CX originally leased three A346 just for the HKG-JFK route only, plus some short hops such as TPE during its layover in HKG...once they got the 773ER, CX don't need the 4-engine anymore...

[vioaltec]

Originally Posted by Blake

well i think SQ is the best example of the a380's worthiness. that and maybe QF, too. SQ's routes are almost all longhaul route. QF uses the a380 on it's longest haul routes, as well. all of those routes are ~7000SM, where it would make business sense to carry as many pax as possible. now, filling those seats is something entirely different. i don't know about SQ, but QF has had trouble selling out a380 flights. now, when the 787 becomes a reality, i think the a380 is going to become even more of a novelty.

conversely, i think as long as they continue to mfg 747's without serious design changes and the need for different parts, the 747 will continue to be the airline's weapon of choice in the long haul/medium haul market, especially in freight as the MD-11F gets phased out.

i suppose my point is, besides being a diehard boeing fan, i think the a380 misses the mark in a lot of categories. a 747 can fly anywhere, while the a380 can't. this particular accident is just another reason i can think of for saying 'when is big too big?'

I think the reason why QF is having problems selling seats is due to its recent incidents with the a380 and other airbuses. The Australian media has basically killed QF's safety reputation. On the other note, SQ a380 seats are selling well, only on demanding routes. Because SIA's people knows where to put these beasts on and understands the martket better than other airlines. Hence why there are usually the world's most profitable international carrier.

[Blake]

another airbus incident....united 497 on april 4th. shortly after takeoff, pilot declared emergency for smoke in cockpit. all flight instruments were lost and they had to do a no gyro approach under low, bkn ceilings.

http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2...anded_aft.html

ATC audio is about midway down that page.

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by vioaltec

I think the reason why QF is having problems selling seats is due to its recent incidents with the a380 and other airbuses. The Australian media has basically killed QF's safety reputation. On the other note, SQ a380 seats are selling well, only on demanding routes. Because SIA's people knows where to put these beasts on and understands the martket better than other airlines. Hence why there are usually the world's most profitable international carrier.

Media sensation :

anything related to A380 could make it to "breaking news"....

"Breaking news from Singapore, ******'s (replace with your least favorite airline) super jumbo A380 has 2 of its main tires replaced. We have aviation analyst blah blah to come and explain what going on over there".....

"Now the mechanics are checking the treads on the tires on the main landing gear, once they were worn out, they will have to replace them, this could be a very serious issue while taxiing or landing."

News title: "A380 close call in Singapore"....

---------------
actually, last time when i flew the SQ A380 from SIN to HKG. It was delayed for about 2-3 hours due to issues of one of the engines fire-retardant bottles. We were already on board and ready to pushback. Then we got the announcement from the flight deck about the computer warning and they are trying to replace the parts.

In the end, we got swapped to another A380 parked next to it. Nothing big deal and we got taken care by SQ (even in econ) with good value of meal vouchers. I actually stuffed from the free food inside SIA terminal...