Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/1901085/

Topic: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: CHRISBA777ER
Posted 2005-01-11 20:05:11 and read 14279 times.

I'm really annoyed with the total lack of respect that people have been giving the A380 on here - shes a milestone aircraft, nobody can deny that - why isnt everyone getting behind it? If Boeing were building the largest and most ambitious passenger plane in the world - would i be behind it? Damn right!

So far i've heard from Europeans, Asians, and Americans alike:

* Its ugly and i dont like it.
* Its a flawed concept and i dont like it.
* Its wings are wrong.
* It will not fly.
* It cant possibly fly as its so ugly.
* It wont fly as they havent sold enough of them yet.
* None of the airports can accept them - so it will flop.
* How many test flight crashes have there been? Whats the likelyhood?
* Its well overweight and so it will fail.
* Its too slow.
* Its not safe.
* Its tail is made of plastic -ergo - i wont fly on it.
* None of the airlines have taken the optional gym, jacuzzi, shops and cafes - I wont fly it as they lied to me.
* It has no cargo bellyhold capacity compared to a 777.
* Id much rather fly a narrowbody and thats why the A380 will fail fail.
* Its uglier than the Shorts Skyvan and thats why no airlines have bought it.
* I dont like it because its so big - if it crashes it will be terrible.
* Its not got enough range.
* The engines are underpowered.
* I wont fly it because i hate baggage carousels.
* I dont like France so i'll stick to British built planes.

Time to get your collective heads out of your collective butts - the A380 is here - get behind it! What cant you just admire it for the marvel of technology it is? Why drag it down? Do you pray at night for it to fail/crash etc? Dont you think thats a bit tragic?

I mean - all the above are personal opinions and you are perfectly entitled to them - but why drag it down for the sake of dragging it down?

I dont care if this turns into an AvB war - its blatently going to anyway - as you are all patently unable to look past the AvB thing - just thought i'd mention my thoughts on this subject.

Doubt you'll care to be honest - too busy slagging off the A340-300 climb performance or the lack of LD3 space on a 767 to listen or see anything beyond yourselves - Get over it people.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2005-01-11 20:14:00 and read 14131 times.

* Its ugly and i dont like it.

that's a subjective opinion that anyone's entitled to give



* Its a flawed concept

only time will tell



* It will not fly.

there's no evidence to support that whatsoever



* It cant possibly fly as its so ugly.
* It wont fly as they havent sold enough of them yet.


this is pure idiocy, and says something about you if you actually let such comments bother you



* None of the airports can accept them - so it will flop.

that's a blatant falsehood



* How many test flight crashes have there been?

plenty



Whats the likelyhood?

existant



* Its well overweight and so it will fail.

it very well could, we dont know that yet



* Its too slow.

dont know that yet


* Its not safe.

has yet to be be proven



* None of the airlines have taken the optional gym, jacuzzi, shops and cafes - I wont fly it as they lied to me.

I'm sure they'll miss your biannual patronage



* I dont like it because its so big - if it crashes it will be terrible.

true



* Its not got enough range.

could very well prove true




* The engines are underpowered.

that has yet to be determined




* I dont like France so i'll stick to British built planes.

then you'll have a hard time getting where you need to go



get behind it! What cant you just admire it for the marvel of technology it is? Why drag it down?

Quite simply because it hasn't proven itself yet, and it's subject to much scrutiny seeing as Airbus has a nasty habit of overestimating and underdelivering its aircrafts' performance specs at EIS.

Hence, your answer.


[Edited 2005-01-11 20:15:42]

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: CHRISBA777ER
Posted 2005-01-11 20:19:14 and read 14082 times.

CBoy - the comments dont bother me mate - i just wonder about people's mindsets when they come out with this stuff (their words not mine)...

....did people really think the same things when the '47 first flew?

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Milan320
Posted 2005-01-11 20:21:26 and read 14064 times.

Don't worry, as the 7E7 comes to fruition, it too will get it's share of praise and criticism inevitably.
However, I propose a separate A vs. B forum so those that relish in such stupidity (unless warranted) can deck it out there and in the process perhaps clean up these forums. Don't think it will happen, but it would be a good idea.

Cheers!
/Milan  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Spike
Posted 2005-01-11 20:22:13 and read 14051 times.

Anyway you missed one - the A380 has a landing gear like never before. Or did the AN-124 have the same?

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Drerx7
Posted 2005-01-11 20:22:41 and read 14045 times.

I think that it is a fairly unattractive aircraft--but I do believe that there is a market for an aircraft of this size--small market but it is still there. I'd love to fly on one. In fact my only problem with airbus is that their aircraft aren't exactly aesthetically pleasing--but that has no merit whatsoever on anything. The A380 will do fine.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Air2gxs
Posted 2005-01-11 20:23:09 and read 14042 times.

So, I'm supposed to like it and get behind it because its new and shiny? Sorry, though I am excited about a new type flying, I have never been an Airbus fan.

I've maintained them, and Boeings and Douglas', and I don't care for the philosophy that Airbus has when it comes to systems. I won't get into that. I don't participate in A. vs. B.

It'll be nice to see it fly and I hope it does succeed, but I doubt that it will for several reasons that I will keep to myself.

But please don't tell me I have to like something because its here. Hemorrhoids are here and I don't like them.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Adria
Posted 2005-01-11 20:24:47 and read 14031 times.

"* I dont like it because its so big - if it crashes it will be terrible.

true"............coming from someone who supports B777 330ETOPS rule Smile


"* Its not got enough range.

could very well prove true"..............you are in no position to even have a slight clue if that is true



"get behind it! What cant you just admire it for the marvel of technology it is? Why drag it down?

Quite simply because it hasn't proven itself yet, and it's subject to much scrunity seeing as Airbus has a nasty habit of overestimating and underdelivering its aircrafts' performance specs at EIS."............how can an aircraft prove itself if it has not left the ground yet?? And talking about nasty habits.....(but seeing someone bashing the A380 only shows that the A380 is very good)









Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Daedaeg
Posted 2005-01-11 20:26:22 and read 14009 times.

Some people may like it and some don't, however I would never take any negative connotations personally. After all it's an airplane, not a person. The world is not going to end because some person on a message board doesn't like the A380. If you see someone making accusations that are false, then counter it with facts. As silly as some opinions are on this forum, everyone is still entitled to them.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: NumberTwelve
Posted 2005-01-11 20:34:15 and read 13969 times.

@Chrisba - I think the English word for it is JEALOUSY.

Some people fear that the 747 will be dethroned.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: CRPilot
Posted 2005-01-11 20:35:02 and read 13959 times.

CHRISBA777ER:

unfortunately some people can only see things in the A or B dimension. It's a foolish train of thought in which people want a product to fail just because their manufacturer of choice did not make that particular aircraft.

Cheers
CRP

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Spike
Posted 2005-01-11 20:35:36 and read 13955 times.

One other thing -- see that enourmous wingtip? I reckon we'll see NG turn-ups once the thing is up, running ans steeeeeached.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2005-01-11 20:42:37 and read 13915 times.

coming from someone who supports B777 330ETOPS rule

ANY aircraft crashing with loss of life is terrible



you are in no position to even have a slight clue if that is true


Wrong again, but no surprise there:

1) the A380's weight (both empty and MTOW), as well as its promised range have significantly increased over the years
2) its fuel capacity and wing design have remained relatively constant since inception
3) Airbus historically overpromises then underdelivers on aircraft performance at EIS


...taking these into account; to postulate the result of less-than-advertised range in the A388 is no stretch in logic.



how can an aircraft prove itself if it has not left the ground yet??

That was the point of the statement, genius  Nuts

[Edited 2005-01-11 20:49:27]

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: NumberTwelve
Posted 2005-01-11 20:46:48 and read 13884 times.

Great, CB, seems as if you have eaten knowledge and brain with a spoon.

And you don't have as much knowledge as the customers - noone of them deleted contract.
You would never buy a 380, so A can live with your opinion  Wink/being sarcastic

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2005-01-11 20:53:13 and read 13861 times.

And you don't have as much knowledge as the customers - noone of them deleted contract.

Basically only reason any of them would delete contracts at this point would be inflexible fiscal obligation.


If the aircraft lives up to its performance specs, the orders will remain and more will come...

...if not, some outstanding orders may be cancelled, incoming orders will slow, and Airbus will have to correct whatever point of contention may have developed if they want the product to remain viable-- as we saw with the MD11.

Simple as that.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Jasepl
Posted 2005-01-11 20:55:29 and read 13839 times.

And then there's some who're willing it to fail!

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Jaysit
Posted 2005-01-11 20:57:03 and read 13833 times.

And you don't have as much knowledge as the customers - noone of them deleted contract.

No one has deleted a contract, but Airbus promised customers an aicraft at 239 tons (w/o fuel and internal furnishings). Right now it is about 4 tons overweight (less than the 14 tons the aviation press reported a year ago). Tim Clark of Emirates has gone on record stating that if Airbus didn't deliver the AC as promised, it would be very expensive for Airbus.

Given that Airbus promised an AC that would be 15-20% more efficient than the 744 to operate, they better not renege on what they promised.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Spike
Posted 2005-01-11 20:59:07 and read 13823 times.

Not so CB. The MD-11 was a far better beast. I'd argue for perfection myself.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Burnsie28
Posted 2005-01-11 21:00:48 and read 13816 times.

Ive got a new one why it will fail, they will have to up the price on them now because Airbus is no longer subsidized.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2005-01-11 21:04:29 and read 13795 times.

I'd argue for perfection myself.

Perfection 'eh?

Guess that's why two PIPs later it still never reached its originally-promised performance specs?

...why its market share was easily overtaken by its younger competitors?

...or why less than a handful of the world's carriers are still flying it pax service, barely 14yrs after its debut?

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: NumberTwelve
Posted 2005-01-11 21:09:04 and read 13758 times.

Here are 4 more, Burnsie:
* there is no market for it in the US
* the 747 is the queen of the skies
* it takes 2 days for Boarding
* it has 4 engines

and number one of the reasons why the 380 will be no success is ......

US didn't order it!

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ExFATboy
Posted 2005-01-11 21:10:52 and read 13742 times.

There are valid reasons to believe the A380 could be a financial failure (as opposed to a technological failure - there have been numerous airliners that were technologically adequate, or even advanced for their day, that were financial disasters):

* Airbus does, from what I have read, have a reputation of overestimating performance. There could be problems if the A380 does not meet specs on range that could require very expensive remediation.

* Even if it does meet specs, in the long run they may simply be unable to sell enough aircraft to make back the investment with a reasonable ROI - as of today (according to Airbus' press release for the UPS order), they only have firm orders for 149 units. OTOH, if the Asian market continues to grow the way it has, sales could pick up.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2005-01-11 21:12:02 and read 13738 times.

"The MD-11 was a far better beast. I'd argue for perfection myself. "

Oy. The MD-11 is my favorite airplane but even I don't delude myself into thinking it was anything more than a duct-taped failure.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Xkorpyoh
Posted 2005-01-11 21:12:19 and read 13735 times.

I am still very impressed by the “Spruce Goose” for its size, beauty and the possibilities it had during those days, but it only flew for a minute or so = business failure

The Concorde is one of my favorites plane, a marvel of engineering, but we know the results = business failure.

It would have been excellent (for us, aviation enthusiasts) to see Boeing continue with its SST project (Sonic Cruiser), but it would have been financially irresponsible and unwise to launch it in the current state of the industry. So they made the right decision.

If Boeing were to launch a new (brand new design) of a 600 pax plane, I would think it was the wrong decision, a crazy idea and something that might doom the company because the trend in the industry is going towards downsizing (747 to 777/340) instead of “supersizing” (747 to A380). That is something you can’t deny.

I think the A380 is impressive for its size and I am sure it would be great to fly on it. More room, modern interior design and features, etc. But, is it the right decision to launch this? What are the real reasons for risking this investment? …that it is!.. there is no “risk of investment” , but Airbus and its backers need to take the crown and wear it proudly as the number one airplane company in the world with the biggest passenger jet ever built.

I am very excited for the A380 and I am glad that Airbus took the risk because for us, aviation enthusiasts, bigger is better, in the same way faster is also better if the SST was ever built. From the point of view of a private company without direct subsidies (Tax breaks can be considered as discounts as not direct cash is invested) the idea of this huge plane would be incomprehensible if a careful study of the aviation trends, investment risks and returns on investments are taking in consideration. That is why the A380 is getting such a bad rap.

Nevertheless, I would be the first one watching the first AF A380 land in MIA in a few years!

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Singaporegirl
Posted 2005-01-11 21:13:03 and read 13730 times.

i'm actually looking forward to fly this new aircraft. unlike most other people in this forum, as a singapore airlines cabin crew, i'm going to be flying the a380s on a regular basis. sq desperately needs the a380s for some of our flights, (mainly lhr and sfo). also sq needs to replace our megatops, which are truly showing their age unfortunately. and on a personal note and as an aviation enthusiast, i love flying any new aeroplane anyday. sometimes i wish sq has a broader range of fleets!

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Burnsie28
Posted 2005-01-11 21:15:20 and read 13708 times.

Here are 4 more, Burnsie:
* there is no market for it in the US
* the 747 is the queen of the skies
* it takes 2 days for Boarding
* it has 4 engines

and number one of the reasons why the 380 will be no success is ......

US didn't order it!


I was just adding to what they were saying, but now that Airbus is no longer subsidized it could be true.

Point one- Their isnt a market really in the US for it

Point two- I couldnt give a S**T about the 747 and its "queen role"

Point three- It will since it will likely only have one jetbridge at most airports lol

Point four- ok, and the point of that was what, the 747 has 4 engines, the A340 has four engines.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: GDB
Posted 2005-01-11 21:21:00 and read 13672 times.

On the idea that it's ugly, well what widebody is sleek and pretty, imposing yes, which the A380 will be for it's sheer size, let's face it, all widebodies look lumbering and big.
Aircraft of this type are so generically similar, that today, the reducing number of L1011/DC-10/MD-11's still around are seen as different looking, due totally to the tri-jet config.
I'll admit that the L1011 had a certain smoothness about it, still a widebody though.
747? Yeah the hump on the 741/742 leant a certain character, but it's still a big widebody, it was quite a sight n the early days, not now.

I'd hate being a young civil aviation enthusiast today, not much variety is there?
Few 707, DC-8, only a few military VC-10 (IMHO, the best looking subsonic jetliner), or Convairs, B727, Trident, BAC-1-11, early DC-9, even the Soviet era types are getting rare outside the CIS, of course no SST's either.

As to will it fail, well I saw a post saying the 7E7 will sell more, well no shit Sherlock! It's designed for a rather larger market, hence the A350 response.

I think of what US aviation writer Rene Fracillion wrote of his time at MDD in the late 60's, in marketing, how they tried so hard to convince airlines that the 747 was way too big, better have the DC-8-61/63 or wait for the DC-10, now the DC-10 sold Okay, but which modernized version of the DC-10 or 747 is still in production now?
He thinks Boeing have made a serious error in effectively giving the A380 a clear run for so long, remember how the 747 was Boeing's main cash cow for nearly 2 decades?

And the leap from narrowbodies to 747 was much greater than today's 747-400 to A380 leap, although a recession slowed things up some for the 747 in the early 70's, whereas the A380 is coming as we emerge from a very bad slump, given that, I'd say the A380 has done well saleswise.

I think some also may want to consider that the airliner market is now different between the US and other parts of the world, how many major airports on the US East Coast serve for example, the UK, now how many UK airports serve the US East Coast in a big way?
It's really only LHR and LGW, not much else from the regions.

Even if Sept 11th had not happened, I'd seriously doubt that UA or NW would have brought the A380, maybe in years to come a few might end up at either of those two carriers, not for a long time however, if at all.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2005-01-11 21:22:35 and read 13664 times.

Boeing continue with its SST project (Sonic Cruiser)

The Sonic Cruiser was not [going to be] an SST

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Milan320
Posted 2005-01-11 21:23:09 and read 13659 times.

NumberTwelve et al. :

I'm with ConcordeBoy here. His extrapolation is perfectly logical based on the facts at hand. Some might have more facts, some less, but his logic is based on well-known facts that are readily available to the public that puts in some effort into finding them.

If Boeing had exactly the same history, we could argue in the same way.

Both A and B are far from perfect, and both companies have their pluses and minuses. Since this is a post about an Airbus product, that's what the discussion is about. If it was about Boeing, we could use their statistical history about certain things and extrapolate just as well. Some of that would be good, some of that would be bad, just like with Airbus.

The main point is, we can surmize certain, it's simple postulation based on readily available facts. Don't get me wrong, I love Airbus, but reason over passion, please!

Cheers!
/Milan


Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: NumberTwelve
Posted 2005-01-11 21:23:36 and read 13652 times.

Sorry, Burnsie, but I also give a SH** to the reasons and rumours and subsidy crap we hear here.
I can only laugh and only can guess that the 380 is a nightmare - not for Airbus but for Boeing.

And sorry, Burnsie. The earth is no disk and there is no country in the middle/centre. So the world doesn't turn around the US - and the 744 is still a success, even if nearly no US airline uses it.

I guess A is only happy with orders when their customers are willing and able to pay.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2005-01-11 21:30:25 and read 13621 times.

let's face it, all widebodies look lumbering and big.

Gonna have to be one of those rare moments when I completely disagree with ya bud.... some widebodies (e.g.: 777, A330, etc) have a VERY svelt, sexy look to them; particularly with wingspan relevant to their overall mass.


how many major airports on the US East Coast serve for example, the UK, now how many UK airports serve the US East Coast in a big way?
It's really only LHR and LGW, not much else from the regions.


But you've hit on something...

...defrag has already kicked in for the USA's 2ndary markets, and even a few tertiary ones.

With the 757 now, and a newer more efficient small aircraft on the way; it's only a matter of time before the importance of secondary markets for nonstop intercontinental travel, grows as well.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Spike
Posted 2005-01-11 21:40:05 and read 13574 times.

Nice to hear from the SQ Press department above. And now for a short commercial break..

You're a great way to fly.. Singaporegirl.

Anyway, I thought CNN anounced Malaysian as the first A380 opperator. Or was that an advertisement too?

How is your tranning going? Where is the shopping mall and cinemas? Any luck with the business center so far?



Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Jaysit
Posted 2005-01-11 21:40:22 and read 13573 times.

But, is it the right decision to launch this?

Well, the thing will fly this year with nearly 140 orders.

In about 10 years, the 744 will have made her final bow, and all you will see at London Heathrow will be A380s, 773ER/LRs, and A345/6s.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: MidnightMike
Posted 2005-01-11 21:58:18 and read 13513 times.

CHRISBA777ER

The comments were worse when the 747 was proposed, as far as negative aviation projects, remember the "Spruce Goose."

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Leskova
Posted 2005-01-11 22:13:30 and read 13455 times.

Oh brother... I think the world must be coming to an end: I agree with each and every single thing that ConcordeBoy posted on this thread!  Big grin

I certainly wish Airbus the best of luck with the A380 - and I'm keeping my fingers crossed that from now on, they'll start rather understating their expected performance at the beginning of a project - because however much I like A340s, they really have had the occasional problem of reaching the promised weights, performances, ...

I sure hope that the A380 turns out to be as successful for Airbus as the B747 was for Boeing, back when they bet the survival of the company on it...

Regards,
Frank

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Aerorobnz
Posted 2005-01-11 22:23:53 and read 13421 times.

Well I don't know about you guys but I'm gonna do my best to be on the first sq flight. It's a marvel that happens to have a forehead like Herman Munster.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: TransPac
Posted 2005-01-11 22:33:24 and read 13390 times.

In about 10 years, the 744 will have made her final bow, and all you will see at London Heathrow will be A380s, 773ER/LRs, and A345/6s.

Yeah, and Boeing, fresh off the massive success of the 7E7 is going to rest on their laurels and completely ignore the VLA market right?  Nuts

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Juanchopancho
Posted 2005-01-11 22:56:27 and read 13334 times.

I wouldn't call the A380 revolutionary, it's evolutionary. Bigger, that's all.

And UPS just ordered 10 so it's no longer just an Euro-Asian thing. Let's see if Fedex orders some as well.

As for the success of the A380, break even is supposed to be around 200 units. Right now they have plus-minus 129 orders. I'm sure they can pick up 70 more over the next few years.

Only problem is that the A380 program is already $2 billion over budget so break even could be a little higher than 200 units & some airlines have already delayed delivery of the A380 by several years.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: CRPilot
Posted 2005-01-11 23:09:50 and read 13295 times.

"I wouldn't call the A380 revolutionary, it's evolutionary. Bigger, that's all."

It's aerodynamic revolutionary, leaps and bounds from the existing VLA's. If you can't see that, I'd suggest talking to an engineer, or perhaps taking a class in the subject.


Cheers

CRP

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: EGNR
Posted 2005-01-11 23:15:17 and read 13274 times.

"And UPS just ordered 10 so it's no longer just an Euro-Asian thing. Let's see if Fedex orders some as well."

FedEx has already ordered 10 A380-F... http://www.airbus.com/dynamic/media/search_result.asp?id=406&&type=&search_mode=&searchedText=fedex&match=exact&context=ae_s_title&date_operator=and&search_month=&search_year=&pos=1

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ScottB
Posted 2005-01-11 23:22:37 and read 13236 times.

"I think of what US aviation writer Rene Fracillion wrote of his time at MDD in the late 60's, in marketing, how they tried so hard to convince airlines that the 747 was way too big, better have the DC-8-61/63 or wait for the DC-10, now the DC-10 sold Okay, but which modernized version of the DC-10 or 747 is still in production now? He thinks Boeing have made a serious error in effectively giving the A380 a clear run for so long, remember how the 747 was Boeing's main cash cow for nearly 2 decades?"

Well, in hindsight, MDD might have been right about the 747, at least for most of the major U.S. carriers. Many of them had lounges, bars, etc. in the 747 because they simply couldn't fill the things. They were bought as a show of prestige by airlines operating in a regulated environment and did not make sense once their operators had to truly compete. The largest U.S. 747 operators (Pan Am, TWA) eventually ended up insolvent. The 747 has made sense for NW and UA largely due to restrictive bilaterals and slot restrictions at NRT. The biggest problems for the DC-10, though, were the crashes early in its history and the fact that it ended up competing with the L1011, A300, and 767. Had only one of the L10 and DC-10 been built, it probably would have been a great success in terms of sales. If another manufacturer had built a 747-sized aircraft at the time, it's likely both would have been flops.

Whether or not the A380 will be a sales success over the long term remains to be seen. I do not think there is any doubt that it would be disastrous for both manufacturers if Boeing were trying to bring a similarly-sized aircraft to market -- the market for aircraft this size is too small today to support two competitors. If the market proves to be larger in ten years, who's to say that Boeing won't come out with a model that one-ups the A380 in performance and operating cost?

People who say the A380 won't fly because it's "too big" or whatever are either ignorant or trying to be provocative. Whether or not you like its looks is entirely subjective. I can feel that it is impressive in size and yet still think it's fugly. Architecture is similar -- I can feel that a particular structure is impressive or imposing and yet still find it unattractive.

My feeling about the A380 (and goodness knows, I could be wrong) is that it will achieve technological success of some degree (modulo Airbus's ability to meet promised performance specs) but will not be the huge economic success that some of you seem to expect. The risk assessment of the project clearly was distorted by the availability of below-market-rate repayable grants (a more accurate term than "repayable loans," since "loan" implies repayment). For the project to simply break even is not success given that there ought to be some better return on investment than a zero percent gain.

I dunno, maybe it's a phallic thing -- "ours is bigger than yours."

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2005-01-11 23:27:55 and read 13215 times.

Oh brother... I think the world must be coming to an end: I agree with each and every single thing that ConcordeBoy posted on this thread!

iz you sick or some'n  Confused



and Boeing, fresh off the massive success of the 7E7 is going to rest on their laurels and completely ignore the VLA market right?

Unless:

1) the A380 flops
2) the forecasted outlook for VLA increases significantly from what Boeing estimates it is today

....then yes, that's exactly what they'll do.




And UPS just ordered 10 so it's no longer just an Euro-Asian thing. Let's see if Fedex orders some as well.

...you're a few years late on that one  Big grin




It's aerodynamic revolutionary

in what way?



leaps and bounds from the existing VLA's

...because there aren't any, perhaps?  Nuts

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: RIX
Posted 2005-01-11 23:30:41 and read 13201 times.

"Some people fear that the 747 will be dethroned." - but the "throne" is not there anyway. Being the biggest airliner (and absolutely amazing flying machine, just look at it), A380 will never play the role that 747 played. Simply because 747 itself doesn't play it anymore. Because now it's all about 330/777 (plus 7E7/350 soon), not those jumbos/superJumbos. As for "there is no market for it in the US" - absolute true, has nothing to do with your "US is not a center of a disk planet" paranoia. Even more, "no US market" may be critical for commercial success of 380. Feel free to disagree but, please, don't be that ready to be offended... it is just an opinion, (a non-jealous one, see  Smile?)

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: FriendlySkies
Posted 2005-01-11 23:32:37 and read 13195 times.

People say stupid things sometimes. Most of it is caused by emotion and lack of control. Other times it's simply opinion. Either way, I don't see the point of this thread, other than a blatent attack on anyone with the nerve to say the A380 is ugly.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: CRPilot
Posted 2005-01-11 23:36:13 and read 13179 times.

"...because there aren't any, perhaps?"

According to the books the Antonov falls in that category.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: BA
Posted 2005-01-11 23:40:41 and read 13164 times.

In about 10 years, the 744 will have made her final bow, and all you will see at London Heathrow will be A380s, 773ER/LRs, and A345/6s.

I'd say more along 15 years, and the reason I say that is because many 744s belonging to the major carriers were built roughly up to 5 years ago.

Now by 10 years, I definately see the number of 744s operating for major carriers to be less, but I think it will still be noticable in major airports well after 10 years.

Getting back to the topic about whether the A380 will be a success or not, I think that depends on your definition of success.

There is definately a market for the A380, however the question is how big is it? I think there is definately a market for a new jumbo in the Asian market for intra-Asia routes and premium high demand trans-continental flights.

That being said, I don't think the A380 will ever be as successful as the B747, even specifically the B747-400.

Definately we have seen a trend in airlines acquiring high numbers of roughly 300-seat aircraft which are used to operate on routes only 747s had operated once upon a time, but at higher frequencies to compensate for the smaller aircraft and I think this is definately a hint on how successful the A380 will be.

So far, A380 orders have been good, mostly thanks to Gulf rich airlines Emirates, Qatar, and Etihad. Especially Emirates with its 45 A380 order (only 2 being options, the first firm orders). However, the question is will this trend continue for many years after the A380 has entered production?

Boeing has always claimed that the market for a jumbo sized aircraft is simply not large enough to support the development of the A380 while Airbus claims the market is still there and simply needs to be revived with a "fresh new jumbo."

My opinion is it is somewhere in between. I definately think the A380 is a prestige project for Airbus, particularly among the general public (not us aviation enthusiasts and the airlines).

We all know that Airbus has proven itself with the development of aircraft such as the A320, A330, and A340 family series, especially the A320 family and the A330-200 which have proven to be extremely successful, the latter being a true threat to Boeing's B767 line.

However, among the eyes of the public, the B747, commonly refered to as the "Jumbo" among the public is regarded as a masterpiece simply because of its sheer size.

Howard Hughes proved that aircraft were really not limited to size with his H-4 Hercules (called the Spruce Goose among the public, even though he strongly disliked that name). However, the public was still stunned by the B747 and many still had questioned if it could fly.

Regardless, Boeing has held a monopoly on the "jumbo" market, and I think Airbus feels that if they develop their own jumbo, they will have given themselves a new status and image among the public.

So while I think the A380 definately has a market, I definately believe it is mostly a matter of prestige to boost its public image.

Now the public can refer to two jumbos, the Boeing jumbo, and the Airbus jumbo, or as many are calling it these says, the "super jumbo."

The airline industry is definately growing, and it is growing exponentially, however competition and costs are increasing as well, and the trend over the years has been higher frequency and smaller aircraft.

I don't think anybody an deny that the jumbo market has shrunk over the years, as a result of the development of aircraft of 200-300 seat aircraft capable of trans-continental flights like the A330, the A340, the 777, and even the 767. The 7E7 will only further push this trend.

My opinion is the A380 will roughly break even, but time will tell. I think it is very difficult to determine how successful the A380 will be this early on. It all on how the airline industry develops in the future and its trend.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: CRPilot
Posted 2005-01-11 23:57:17 and read 13102 times.

"in what way?" OK Concorde here it is plain and simple.

Despite the fact that I think you're smart enough to realize it, I'll indulge your comment:

Lift, Weight, Thrust, and Drag. The four active forces on any aircraft in flight. Weight counters Lift, Drag counters Thrust. You with me so far? Good.

Max take off weight on the A380 = 1,235,000lbs.

In order to keep the A380 in the air your have to have an incredible amount of lift, thus:

Powerplants Trent 900/GP7000

and ofcourse

Wing span (geometric) 261 ft 8 in 79,8 m

Wing area (reference) 9,100 ft2 845 m2

Sweep (25% chord) 33,5 degrees

This is where it all is. I won't get into the MAC, TEMAC, LEMAC, sweep, etc. But I can tell you that the wing span and wing area of this magnitude is a work of art, is ingenious and innovative, and obviously uncharted until now.

I can get a lot more technical if you need me to, but I don't think is necessary.


Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Ltbewr
Posted 2005-01-12 00:01:05 and read 13083 times.

The A-380 isn't a aircraft to be made in huge volumes. It is for a limited number of long, high demand, slot limited airports, mainly in/out of Asia. As suggested above, the 'break-even' is at about 200 frames and orders/proposed orders stand about 129. Not bad so far for a proposed a/c.
Of course if it performs as planned or not, various crises - political (Terrorism), social (civil wars), health (think SARS crises) as well as positive events, such as patterns of trade, tourism and business demands, could affect demand for this a/c in the next decade. There is a risk here as to if it succedes or fails, just like any other a/c. How many 747's in all variants have been or are being made for 35+ years, and of that, how many are still flying? When the 747-100 was proposed, I don't think Boeing figured it would sell or be made this long. Probably the total number of A-380's that will be made will be a fraction of the 747's made/to be made. Will Airbus be making them for 35+ years? Will it be a failure of sorts as was the DC-10/MD-11 or especially the L-1011? Will it evolve over time becoming bigger, use newer materials, correct some of the early design flaws that will happen - of course it will.
I think some here despise the A-380, as it will replace the 747's as king of the skies and will lead to the eventual end of the 747 line (although really the 777 is replacing much of it's market and the changes in airlines to smaller a/c and greater frequency). We are on a great adventure as we see the A-380 come out and serve the public.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Boeing7E7
Posted 2005-01-12 00:04:13 and read 13035 times.

Time to get your collective heads out of your collective butts - the A380 is here - get behind it! What cant you just admire it for the marvel of technology it is? Why drag it down? Do you pray at night for it to fail/crash etc? Dont you think thats a bit tragic?

Why should I or anyone get behind an aircraft that has cost airports more money in retrofits than Airbus has spent in R&D? And it hasn't even flown yet. It's not a technology marvel, the 7E7 is a technology marvel. Making something big and fat does not make it a technology marvel. I don't pray it will crash, I do pray it will actually get off the ground. The Spruce Goose got off the ground once too though. In my opinion, the aircraft to too damn big. But I don't do much work with nationalized carriers that buy their aircraft with government money, I deal with the private sector that has to be concerned with shareholder value. Buying for freight is one thing, buying for pax service is another. I don't hate the thing, but it's a bit much.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2005-01-12 00:14:15 and read 12932 times.

I can get a lot more technical if you need me to, but I don't think is necessary

you've somehow managed to completely miss the forest for the trees...

...all you managed to bandy was simple increase in scale. Nothing revolutionary about that whatsoever: heck, that's akin to calling the 773(ER) "revolutionary" for their same scale relevant to twinjets.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: BeechNut
Posted 2005-01-12 00:16:57 and read 12904 times.

I dont like it because its so big - if it crashes it will be terrible.

There exists a mode of transport that has, on occasion, snuffed out far more lives than a mid-air collision between two A380s is capable of, and at less than 20 knots at that. Can you say T-I-T-A-N-I-C?

"I'd hate being a young civil aviation enthusiast today, not much variety is there?
Few 707, DC-8, only a few military VC-10 (IMHO, the best looking subsonic jetliner), or Convairs, B727, Trident, BAC-1-11, early DC-9, even the Soviet era types are getting rare outside the CIS, of course no SST's either.


I just spotted a B720 on final approach today. As in Boeing Seven-Twenty. How many of you can claim that today?  Big grin

Mike

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Thrust
Posted 2005-01-12 00:35:36 and read 12740 times.

The A380 may be successful, but by no means should you Airbus people say that Airbus is victorious over Boeing. The A380 may not be a success in the long term of Boeing actually launches the 747 Advanced. THe 747 Advanced, if it proves superior to the A380, could easily steal potential A380 orders away from Airbus. My guess we will able to tell a lot of how successful it could be based on whether Boeing decides to launch the 747 Advanced or not.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: CRPilot
Posted 2005-01-12 00:37:55 and read 12711 times.

"...all you managed to bandy was simple increase in scale."


Wrong...the 777 was a revolution in thrust to weight ratio (engines), not in wing design. Obviously you're unaware that the wing for the A380 is a completely different design, tailored to maximize the lift factor on the heaviest passenger aircraft in the world, while allowing it to travel at speeds at and above M.89.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: N317AS
Posted 2005-01-12 00:41:44 and read 12671 times.

Personally I am one that said "It is ugly, but let's wait until it gets paint." Boeing jets are ugly when they are green also. I love the wing, I hate the nose, but damn, I can't wait to see it fly!!! As for failing, I don't think it will, and hope it doesn't because I may be working for them someday.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Dc10guy
Posted 2005-01-12 00:48:20 and read 12607 times.

Boeing has held the #1 spot for a long time. Losing that spot is tough for a lot of people. All that national pride stuff, waving the flag etc. etc. I think Airbus could be the best thing that ever happened to Boeing. They have no choice but to compete. I didn't like Airbuses at first when my airline bought them ... 12 years down the road they are now the best airplane in out fleet and I think they are great. The world will recognize the A380 for what it is ... A great aviation milestone !!! BRAVO !!!

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Zvezda
Posted 2005-01-12 00:51:56 and read 12567 times.

Now I'm confused. I thought the reason it couldn't possibly fly is because the cockpit windows seem too small for a plane that size. Big grin

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: PyroGX41487
Posted 2005-01-12 00:52:54 and read 12554 times.

The A380 IS revolutionary. Think about it... Full twin decks, the most passengers ever carried by a commercial aircraft (to me, 550 - 840 is pretty damned revolutionary, even if it's not comftorable) not to mention that thus far, development has seemingly gone off without a hitch. The engines were delivered on time and fitted, and as far as we call tell, she's going to take off on schedule March 31.

Some may say she's an ugly bird. Man, if you judge aircraft that way, I'd hate to think of how you judge your women  Big grin. Although I really think she's beautiful, I belive it's better to think about what she stands for.

Yeah, she may be a big hulking beast, but by the numbers we have, she has unpresidented (sp?) efficiency and if she lives up to those she'll be a great success.

As for aerodynamic efficiency and a .85 Mach cruise speed, I'd say she's pretty revolutionary.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Bill142
Posted 2005-01-12 00:54:41 and read 12535 times.

Some people fear that the 747 will be dethroned.

It was always going to be the case. Its called product life cycle. Its going to end for the 747 sooner or later, just like it did for the 757.

Here are 4 more, Burnsie:
* there is no market for it in the US
* the 747 is the queen of the skies
* it takes 2 days for Boarding
* it has 4 engines


appart from point one the other three points don't really prove anything except that your one of the people who seems to be unable to accept the A380. Basicly your one of the people this thread is out to understand why you cannot accept it and must defame it.

As suggested above, the 'break-even' is at about 200 frames and orders/proposed orders stand about 129
If you count the MOU's already signed by Thai, Etihad and UPS then the actual number of orders is upto 149

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Baw716
Posted 2005-01-12 01:42:26 and read 12230 times.

I think I was one that had some marginal thoughts about the aestetics of the A380. However, now it has engines and a coat of paint, she looks a whole lot better. As to how she will fly... oh yes, she'll fly. I've said it before. Hang enough power onto a pair of wings and it will fly. Its a matter of getting the balances of the forces right. The weight and size are really secondary.

Watching her take off for the first time will be a sight for sure...
I live in Seattle, I'm a member of the Boeing family (literally...three employees in the family). We all acknowledge that Airbus makes one heck of an airplane. Its actually good for Boeing, because it makes them work just a little bit harder.

So hats off to Airbus on the A380.
Let the jumbo wars begin...
baw716

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: B777fan
Posted 2005-01-12 01:50:55 and read 12152 times.

Hat's off to ConcordeBoy, you made reading this post worthwhile.

All planes eventually have to prove themselves, from A or B.

It won't be long now until this bird is in the air and the numbers start coming in. If A has built a plane that lives up to the promises good for them and all of us.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: AirEMS
Posted 2005-01-12 02:18:30 and read 11942 times.

Not to take anything away from Airbus this is a huge achievement but I (note I said I as in this is my thoughts) don't think I would like having to rub elbows with 500 other passengers no matter how cool the cabin will be and how open it will be...... I just think when boarding starts they should say all aboard the cattle car.... Like I said just my thoughts

Fly Safe
-Carl

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: OldAeroGuy
Posted 2005-01-12 02:37:06 and read 11815 times.

CRPilot,

If the A380 ever completes a flight from Singapore to LHR with a full passenger payload at an average cruise speed of M.89, I'll agree with you that it's an aerodynamic revolution.

Until then, it's a mighty big and impressive evolution.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Thrust
Posted 2005-01-12 02:43:50 and read 11755 times.

As to those who say the A380 will never fly, that is just plain ridiculous. Every component of the A380 underwent wind tunnel testing, including the wings, engines, etc, don't know exactly how that stuff works. If it was proven the plane could not fly, Airbus would have long ago given up on the A380. Trust me, that thing will fly, no matter how ugly it may be. Planes do not have to be good looking to fly. As to those of you said the A380 will be revolutionary, so would the 747Adv. It will feature an all-new wing, brand new 7E7 technology, and it will carry at least as many pax as the A380. Several key airlines, among them BA, appeart to like the idea of a new 747. Don't count the 747 as dethroned just yet.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Concordeloss
Posted 2005-01-12 02:51:23 and read 11704 times.

Some people fear that the 747 will be dethroned.

Sooner or later it will be. If not by the 380 then by something else.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: B2707SST
Posted 2005-01-12 03:12:06 and read 11574 times.

But I can tell you that the wing span and wing area of this magnitude is a work of art, is ingenious and innovative, and obviously uncharted until now.

The A380's wing is not the biggest in history. The Spruce Goose, a 1940s design, had a wing measuring 11,430 square feet, 25% bigger than the A380's. The AN-225 is larger than the A380 in every almost dimension, including wing span and wing area.

The A380 has made a number of advances, such as the use of composites in fuselage skin panels, and I'm sure the wing incorporates a number of improvements over previous models, e.g. optimization for a higher cruise speed. But when all is said and done, the wing appears to be a fairly conventional, if more highly developed, supercritical section swept at a quite tame 33.5 degrees (compare to 37.5 degrees on the 747). The engines are well within established thrust regimes. Several double-deckers have been built, albeit on a smaller scale, including portions of the 747, the C-5, and the AN-225. Fly-by-wire and glass cockpits have been featured on several generations of Airbus aircraft.

The A380 is a major advance in commercial aviation due to its sheer size. But when the individual technologies involved are compared with their previous applications, it's hard to call much of the A380 truly "revolutionary." Even the 7E7's composite construction is simply applying a well-known process on larger scale. As frustrating as it may be for enthusiasts, evolution is the key word: civil aviation seems to have reached something of a plateau where it's difficult for any viable aircraft design to be especially radical. Viz. Concorde, the 7J7 propfan, the BWB, the HSCT, the Sonic Cruiser, etc.

--B2707SST

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Malaysia
Posted 2005-01-12 04:04:08 and read 11345 times.

When will the LOCKHEED L-1011 with trent 900s be built? would be much cooler than A380, even if a new L-1011 had to be built in someplace like Taiwan, ROC under license. haha

[Edited 2005-01-12 04:11:36]

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Skymileman
Posted 2005-01-12 04:29:52 and read 11226 times.

I agree with concorde boy up at the top, the different comments are either opinions or are yet to be proven with a few exceptions for stupidity. It has to be proven before we can call it a milestone air craft. Until then, it is just a truck.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Reggaebird
Posted 2005-01-12 06:54:39 and read 10678 times.


All I can say is thank God for Boeing planes. Without them, we would all be flying in Junkers and Kawasaki planes now....those of us who would not have been destroyed for being "inferior". Maybe that's what's behind this AvsB thing. It's the great war...evolved 60 years!

Get over it. The Yanks won!

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Foxiboy
Posted 2005-01-12 11:14:09 and read 9790 times.

Reggae ;- not on their own they didnt, there were a few other countries involved

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: NumberTwelve
Posted 2005-01-12 12:02:56 and read 9590 times.

... and the greatest reason why the 380 will fail is (rataplan) ...

it's a target for terrorists.

So let's build planes with less than 10 seats only and everything will be fine.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Na
Posted 2005-01-12 12:04:06 and read 9586 times.

Remember that even Boeing thought about the 747 before 1970 it would become only a minor success with production in the low 100s and less than 10 years building time. They thought the SST was the way to go.

I also can´t stand all this crappy posts here downwriting the A380. The logic that a potential A380 crash would be so horrible that we better shouldn´t fly it is particularly ridiculous. If so, you better don´t build houses more than 5 storys high.

Airbus reputation is standing and falling with the A380, far more than with any other plane they built. So they´ll try extra-hard to get it right. Be sure of that. ...ok, I´ll exclude the designers of the A380s nose here  Smile

The A380s sales success is very much depending on if Boeing builds a 747 Advanced or not. If not, most economically sound 744 operators will have to order some A380s eventually as the smaller alternatives won´t do the job. BA, JAL, NWA, CX to name just a few. But if Boeing builds it, Airbus needs to be very watchful.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: NumberTwelve
Posted 2005-01-12 12:13:09 and read 9533 times.

@Na: you forgot:
there is no market for a 555 seater  Wink/being sarcastic

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Aerosol
Posted 2005-01-12 12:34:04 and read 9445 times.

Airbus Planes:
-do not meet performance specs
-are ugly
-no real planes
-unsafe
-sluggish take off performance
-terrorist targets (that's my favourite)

All I say is:


370 orders

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Maersk737
Posted 2005-01-12 12:52:43 and read 9346 times.

"370 orders"

that's because Airbus is selling each and every plane with a great loss  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


Ha ha

Cheers

Peter

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Levent
Posted 2005-01-12 13:10:04 and read 9236 times.

Surely a young, beginning pilot wouldn´t care what the airplane looks like or whether he/she´ll fly an Airbus or Boeing or Antonov... as long as he/she can fly!

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: ConcordeLoss
Posted 2005-01-12 14:09:31 and read 8973 times.

Surely a young, beginning pilot wouldn´t care what the airplane looks like or whether he/she´ll fly an Airbus or Boeing or Antonov... as long as he/she can fly!

Don't call him Surely please.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Bill142
Posted 2005-01-12 14:09:59 and read 8967 times.

Airbus Planes:
-do not meet performance specs

generally true.

-are ugly

So what? All new aircraft have to forego aerodynamic efficiency just so you can look at a nice plane?

-no real planes

So that A320 I saw taxi past me at SYD last week was just an illusion? I didn't see David Copperfield anywhere.

-unsafe

Conclusive evidence?

-sluggish take off performance

You've been reading to many threads about the A340-300 haven't you?

-terrorist targets (that's my favorite)

Since the terrorists seem to hate Americans more, wouldn't a Boeing plane be a more likely target?

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: NumberTwelve
Posted 2005-01-12 14:14:51 and read 8923 times.

Bill 142, maybe you didn't realise the sarcasm in Aerosol's (and in my) post.

We can't take all these "380 is a catastrophy" very serious - everybody who knows how to write "airline" thinks he can "inform" us about the bad performance of a plane that didn't even fly, about the terrorism target of a plane that never was a target of terrorism (how could it be one, if it didn't even fly), these posts are absolutely nonsense and that is what Aerosol wants to say.

[Edited 2005-01-12 14:20:04]

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: JMV
Posted 2005-01-12 14:40:15 and read 8768 times.

The Wall Street Journal has a rather lengthy article in today's edition regarding the A380. It seems fairly balanced stating if successful, profits could be huge, which will provide much needed funding for future R&D, and a lift to EADS stock.

"If the A380 proves a success in the market, the fat profits Airbus is promising could boost shares in the plane maker's Franco-German parent, European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co., which owns 80% of Airbus."

"Robert Mazuelos, a portfolio manager at Hansberger Global Investors Inc. in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., who has followed the aerospace industry for many years, is betting that A380 is "going to be wonderful for the company's profits." Hansberger holds more than one million EADS shares. "We're going to be rewarded for holding the stock," Mr. Mazuelos predicts."

However, some analysts are less optimistic.

"The A380's size could add so many seats to the market that it hurts airline profits, Chris Logan and Hugo Scott-Gall, equity analysts at Goldman Sachs in London, warned in a recent report. They say the A380 "represents a risk to pricing" power among airlines, especially on lucrative Asian routes. If the A380 swamps airline profits, demand for the plane could drop quickly, some analysts say."

"More immediately, Airbus "is going to be facing major currency head winds" over the next few years from the strengthening euro, says Kevin Lilley, a senior fund manager of European equities at Royal London Asset Management Ltd. in London. Airbus is moving to protect itself from the euro's strength by buying more components priced in dollars."

Subscribers can access the entire story at http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,heard_on_the_street,00.html

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Soups
Posted 2005-01-12 15:10:24 and read 8580 times.

imagine on a normal flight carrying 555 passengers where each passengers have checked in two pieces of bags . you sure have to wait for a long time to find your bag between 1110 suitcases.... have airport made changes to carousels? i.e. bigger ones?

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Dutchflyer
Posted 2005-01-12 15:32:43 and read 8423 times.

http://reiskrant.nl/reiskrant/reisnieuws/17157091/Vlaggenschip_van_Airbus_laat_Nederland_links_liggen.html

According to a dutch avation expert the A380 only will succeed in Asia en the Middle East. He doens't believe that people are willing to travel to one central point and then travel further with the A380 and then again board a small plane to reach his/her destination. He beleives Airbus is running a major financial risk, but looking one the comments on A.net the EC is the one running this risk.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: 3lions
Posted 2005-01-12 15:39:41 and read 8368 times.

What happened to innocent until proven guilty.
So many people have already jailed the poor thing before it has even taken off.
It seems like most (and I say most, not all) Americans hope this thing to fail miserably.
Hey, America is not the world, There is life outside your country.
If the A380 is a failure after it has been in service and its numbers are poor.
Ok then you have proof.
But I feel it will be a great seller and a great aircraft.
The airports and skies are so full, If the number of aircraft are reduced in the sky because so many people can travel at once. Surely that's a safer place.
The Airlines like airbus too. Get over it.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Kim777fan
Posted 2005-01-12 15:52:35 and read 8259 times.

Can't think of a single plane in history people didn't expect to fail until it actually went into service.

The Lockheed Constellation was beset by so many mechanical problems its first couple of years, it got the dubious distinction of being called the "World's Greatest Tri-Motor" since it was always losing an engine.

The 747 was a monstrosity that wouldn't fly.

People didn't think the DC10 would ever fly again after a deadly crash at O'Hare in 1979.

It's human nature to doubt. People are also forecasting doom, gloom, woe, agony, and despair on the 7E7, but I'm sure it will eventually be a great plane.
Heck, people are trying to say the Embraer 190 will never fly for that matter.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: PacificWestern
Posted 2005-01-12 16:35:54 and read 7957 times.

To me, the A380 is ugly...FUGLY. And I'm not particularly an Airbus fan either, but that does not mean I expect the plane to fail and nor do I want it to. Simply because one has a negative opinion does not mean they have or hope for negative results.

And no one has the right to dictate to me where I ought to place my support.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Knoxibus
Posted 2005-01-12 17:23:43 and read 7647 times.

It's not a technology marvel, the 7E7 is a technology marvel.

I think coming from a poster with Boeing7E7 as a nickname could not be more subjective...

Care to prove your points at least?

I know many respected posters here (from both sides of the pond) will agree that the 7E7 is still a conventional design, despite its evolution in manufacturing and systems.

Composite manufacturing is already done the same way, or at least very similarly.

And let's not talk about cost and maintenance improvements, because what would you expect of a design which is still not frozen and which have at least 8 years of technology improvements behind it compared to the previous launched new models?

And do you have the slightest idea how "evolutionary" the systems and avionics inside this aircraft are?

Integrated Modular Avionics (applications are now run from fewer LRUs which are using specific cards for every softwares).
Network Services Systems (with AFDX network, Fiber Optic Backbone)
Switches for the network with open and closed worlds to prevent hackers to temper with the important systems such as flight management.

This aircraft is so full of evolutions that it has taken Systems Testing to a whole new level, that even demanded even more R&D.

And I mean, the A340-500/600, which are very complex aircraft systems wise, sounds like peanuts to me now.

Every entirely new model launch will bring tremendous evolutions in all aspects, aerodynamics, maintenance and operations, manufacturing, cabins (and hopefully cost savings), but as long as I don't see a blended wing airliner, powered by nuclear or plasma technology, made out of enhanced titacompopaper, I won't see a revolutionnary aircraft.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Cwapilot
Posted 2005-01-12 17:32:58 and read 7588 times.

It depends on whether you mean "expect it to fail" (which is the highest form of blasphemy), or simply question its perfection (aka divinity, which is the second highest form of blasphemy).

Those who think the first test flight will result in a ball of flames at the end of the runway are as ridiculous as those who take any legitimate question about the claims made by Airbus regrading the A380 as "expecting it to fail".

It is a human-made contraption (unless some megalomaniacs in Toulouse think themselves otherwise), and is bound to have issues. To mention these doesn't mean you are bashing the aircraft, nor does it mean you expect it to fail. I see just as much or more of this skepticism aimed at the 7e7 (it's ugly; it will crumble if damaged; none of the technological advances promised will be delivered, etc.).

Get over it! If you are taking these things personally, you need to separate this VEHICLE from your vision of your national and personal identity, and get some perspective.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Daedaeg
Posted 2005-01-12 17:49:07 and read 7478 times.

I have to agree with Cwapilot, some of you are taking criticism way too personally. If a person says the nose is ugly you act as if they're talking about your momma. I personally dont find it ugly and look forward to seeing it take-off. However I'm more interested in it's performance, more so than looks. Considering Airbus' record on performance, I dont think it is wrong to question it's capabilities. I do believe it's silly when people say it wont take off because it's too big. But that's said out of ignorance and should not be taken seriously.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: AirFrnt
Posted 2005-01-12 18:39:22 and read 7136 times.

Ignoring some of the more useless trolls up above, I would add this bit to the list. I simply am against the A380 because I feel it causes airplane makers to endorse failed business plans. Very few people here mention the absolute havoc that the 747s caused when introduced. Mostly they flew empty. The only way to get them full in the United States was to force hub and spoke systems and do strange pricing models to subsidize failed routes. For example, take a look at People Express's complete crash when they introduced the EWR to DEN "bridge" using 747s. The A380 with it's vast number of seats and high cost of infrastructure will continue the trend of airliners demanding that all pasengers head to a central hub to fly around countries and nations. This is not what consumers want in the long run (more point to point service). The 747 worked because PA was dominant at it's launch. There are far more carriers flying to far more places now. Any carrier that demands that all of the international traffic come from a single point (so they can actually fill up one of these birds) will shortly find themselves loosing money on connecting routes to keep competitive with other carriers who offer more convient flights to and from more destinations without the cost of a connecting flight.

Market space for flying is growing by leaps and bounds. Therefore, it makes sense to meet the new customers needs. That means a lot more Asian flights, a lot more point to point American traffic (is it a mistake that the most consistently profitable American airline is Southwest?) and more hub to hub traffic. Boeing is betting on the first two.

There is no question in my mind that the Boeing composite and bleedless engines are revolutionary. There is also no question that Airbus is taking perhaps the last evolutionary step of the alum body plane with this next model. My gut reaction is that Airbus will be in the same position that Boeing was when Airbus introduced fly by wire. If the composite experement works, Boeing will be in a great position to relaunch there entire line (most notably, the 737 which is clearly inferior to the newer A320s) while Airbus scrambles to catch up.

If large capacity does (and I really think it will not) kick in, I expect boeing to go with a BWB design anyways.

The one last comment that I would make is that it seems like the Americans and Europeans have traded spaces over the last few years here. Now the Europeans are the one who seem completely arrogant and the Americans are the ones who seem to be openly wishing for the doom of thier competitor.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: GDB
Posted 2005-01-12 21:50:21 and read 6480 times.

Airfrnt, so the 747 caused some headaches in the US domestic market?
So what, Pan Am pushed Boeing to start the project, that's the key, an international carrier, most 747's have been sold outside the US, they helped create the air travel market we have today.
Just because point to point is so prevalent in the US does not mean the same will be true everywhere, that market will surely expand, however you cannot
get away from the expansion of airtravel, which still to a large extent happens from hubs, if you lived as close to LHR as I do, you'd see it.
I think calling anything on either the A380 or 7E7 revolutionary is false, they are highly developed conventional airliners in their own fields, the 7E7 cannot even claim to set pax capacity records (it's not supposed to), but I'm sure you can point out new technology, refined techniques, equally on both aircraft.
Comet, 707, Concorde, 747, they were revolutionary.

As to the comment further up as to 'why should US airports upgrade for A380', so in 1968-70 airports outside the US should have had the same attitude?
Wouldn't have stayed majors airports for long if they had, of course had Boeing been first off the VLA blocks (747-700?) you'd really have attitude right?

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Aerorobnz
Posted 2005-01-12 23:00:33 and read 6403 times.

"All I can say is thank God for Boeing planes. Without them, we would all be flying in Junkers and Kawasaki planes now....those of us who would not have been destroyed for being "inferior". Maybe that's what's behind this AvsB thing. It's the great war...evolved 60 years!

Get over it. The Yanks won!"

hahahahahahahaha that's a good one,you said it like you were deadly serious.
Just like it was later in Vietnam.The US Govt manipulated the history that they wanted to hear. The fact is,that no individual country won the war, it wasa collective effort,thatwas the premise for creating the UN. BTW that has nothing to do with Airbus or Boeing whatsoever.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Coa764
Posted 2005-01-12 23:54:06 and read 6378 times.

You folks can really argue about some stupid stuff but I will digress and add two valid points:

First the "it's unsafe" and "one crash and 500 people will die" is absurd! I am not an Airbus fan, that being said, I very seriously doubt that the company would build and the FAA/JAA would certify an unsafe airplane. In 2002 42,850 people died in the US in auto related deaths but I never hear anyone complaining about how unsafe and A fully loaded bus can be.

The other factor that could limit he success of this big bird is the amount of airports that can handle it in concerns of *wing span on runways, taxiways/separation, the weight on airport bridges, and size/passenger capacity at the terminals. Airbus is projecting in *2006/7 LHR, CDG, LGW, SIN, NRT, SYD, JFK, LAX, SFO, MIA, DXB, DOH and 2008/9 FRA, BKK, HKG, KIX, EWR, MEM, ORD, IND, ANC, STN, YUL will be able to handle this aircraft with potential field of MAD, AMS, TPE, SEL, DEL, BOM, KUL, MEL, BNE, AKL, IAD, MCO, RUH, JED, KHI, EZE, MEX, YVR. With only 23 destinations that initially will be able to handle this aircraft users are limited to which routes they can schedule such a large aircraft so you could ask the question: Is there enough demand for a JFK-CDG or LAX-SYD, with competition from other airlines flying small aircraft, to sell the seats required to break even or turn a profit on that segment?

*http://www.airbuschina.com.cn/pdf/a380/a380airport_compat.pdf

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Ozglobal
Posted 2005-01-13 00:41:09 and read 6315 times.

AirFrnt,

It is reductionist to judge the economics of the A380 on the basis of the US market. The US market is overwhelmingly short haul domestic. Many other markets are heavily long haul, international (Asia, Australia and others). On the basis of your US argument, the 747 should never have been built and was entirely flawed in it economic conception. It's tremendous success shows the US market not to be highly relevant in the question.
To take one example, I travel fairly frequently between Europe and Australia. QF operates around four daily 744's between LHR and Australia (BA several as well, not to mention many other carriers). The flight takes around 24 hours. Plus, slots are capped at LHR and I don't believe QF has any more options since they introduced their services to LHR via HKG. Can you imagine an armarda of A319's leaving every half hour taking people to every city in Australia? Now can you see the economics of a larger scale aircraft delivering higher yeild on a very long haul route using the same slot as the 744?
Take another example: SYD or MEL - LAX. People are often showing the number 744's sitting at LAX, waiting to return. Smacks of a route in need of capacity, wouldn't you say?

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui



Look at the A380, think outside the US boarders, see how the rest of the world works and you'll get it.

Ozglobal

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Boeing7E7
Posted 2005-01-13 07:40:46 and read 6190 times.

think coming from a poster with Boeing7E7 as a nickname could not be more subjective...

Care to prove your points at least?


Open architecture avionics, composite airframe, bleedless systems, fuel cell vs. APU when fuel cell is available...

I know many respected posters here (from both sides of the pond) will agree that the 7E7 is still a conventional design, despite its evolution in manufacturing and systems.

Hardly conventional.

Composite manufacturing is already done the same way, or at least very similarly.

Perhaps on the B-2, but no commmercial aircraft is even close.

And let's not talk about cost and maintenance improvements, because what would you expect of a design which is still not frozen and which have at least 8 years of technology improvements behind it compared to the previous launched new models?

I thought you said it was conventional?

And do you have the slightest idea how "evolutionary" the systems and avionics inside this aircraft are?

The E-170 has a more advanced avionics system than the A-380.

Integrated Modular Avionics (applications are now run from fewer LRUs which are using specific cards for every softwares).
Network Services Systems (with AFDX network, Fiber Optic Backbone)
Switches for the network with open and closed worlds to prevent hackers to temper with the important systems such as flight management.


Trying to talk like you know something about Avionics doesn't work too well.

This aircraft is so full of evolutions that it has taken Systems Testing to a whole new level, that even demanded even more R&D.

Evolutions, yes. Revolutions, not even maybe.

And I mean, the A340-500/600, which are very complex aircraft systems wise, sounds like peanuts to me now.

That's because it is peanuts.

Every entirely new model launch will bring tremendous evolutions in all aspects, aerodynamics, maintenance and operations, manufacturing, cabins (and hopefully cost savings), but as long as I don't see a blended wing airliner, powered by nuclear or plasma technology, made out of enhanced titacompopaper, I won't see a revolutionnary aircraft.

The 7E7 will change the way 90% of all commercial aircraft are made forever. Period. End of story. That is a revolution. Once one titanium/composite matrix product flies, everyone will be making titanium/composite matrix aircraft. The weight savings and physical strength of the material are just too good to pass up, especially if you want an RJ or narrowbody that burns 20-30% less fuel, which they will.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Udo
Posted 2005-01-13 08:08:15 and read 6179 times.

The E-170 has a more advanced avionics system than the A-380.

Source please.


Trying to talk like you know something about Avionics doesn't work too well.

Can you do it better?


Evolutions, yes. Revolutions, not even maybe.

If that belief helps you...everyone has to believe in something...  Wink/being sarcastic


That's because it is peanuts.

You're the perfect person to judge...  Laugh out loud


The 7E7 will change the way 90% of all commercial aircraft are made forever. Period. End of story.

Sounds like all these promises from the White House in the past years...  Wink/being sarcastic


That is a revolution.

Amen. Now you get the cookie.



Regards
Udo

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Boeing7E7
Posted 2005-01-13 08:18:09 and read 6173 times.

The E-170 has a more advanced avionics system than the A-380.

Source please.


Honeywell Primus EPIC is the most advanced avionics package in the world. Period. Every avionics buff on the planet knows this. Capable of fully autonomous navigation with no other sources once internal reference is set, backbone of the B-2 and ATF, soon to be the backbone of the 7E7. Moving map, flightbag, HUD and by 2008 FLIR.


Trying to talk like you know something about Avionics doesn't work too well.

Can you do it better?


What, be technical as opposed to cutting and pasting from a website as he did? Thales can only copy.

Evolutions, yes. Revolutions, not even maybe.

If that belief helps you...everyone has to believe in something...


Keep holding onto the hope that the 380 is some kind of technical marvel.

The 7E7 will change the way 90% of all commercial aircraft are made forever. Period. End of story.

Sounds like all these promises from the White House in the past years...


Politics has nothing to do with it. BTW... Airbus needs another loan? I though they were king of the hill. They still need government loans? That's just sad.

Airbus Planes:
-do not meet performance specs
-are ugly
-no real planes
-unsafe
-sluggish take off performance
-terrorist targets (that's my favourite)

All I say is:


370 orders


So why do you need $1 Billion in launch aid for the 350 then? Can't go it alone or just sold 370 birds because you undercut the competition so badly to make that number that you don't have your own funds? I mean, if I had those kind of numbers I think I'd be able to invest in quite a few new aircraft.

[Edited 2005-01-13 08:31:32]

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Knoxibus
Posted 2005-01-13 09:00:08 and read 6150 times.

Open architecture avionics

Existing on the A380, and it's going to fly soon...

composite airframe; Perhaps on the B-2, but no commmercial aircraft is even close

Already done, not in that size I admit, but nothing new. (Beechcraft Starship)

Just have to adapt the manufacturing process....

bleedless systems

Whowwww that's a technology marvel, certainly more than when the bypass engine was created...

fuel cell vs. APU when fuel cell is available...

When it's available.......

I thought you said it was conventional?

Yes but my point was an aircraft that provides 20% cost reductions over its direct competitor (admittedly), whereas there is almost 10 years differences between the design launch, is hardly revolutionary.

The E-170 has a more advanced avionics system than the A-380.

Now you have no idea what you are talking about, and I actually do...but since you're a pilot, and master all the aircraft systems I guess you know better how the AFDX and Arinc protocols, command words and timings operate.

Trying to talk like you know something about Avionics doesn't work too well.


Now I will take this as an insult, since I guess my master's degree in that field, as well as the various positions I had in relations to this domain, and the actual job I am getting paid for and which I love, are bullshit and useless.

Evolutions, yes. Revolutions, not even maybe

Boeing 7E7, where did you see I was saying the A380 was revolutionary???

I guess you should read my post slowly and carefully because I think you just missed my points.

Once again, I try to balance things out on this forum (people should read my signature, and I am an Airbus employee), but people blinded by subjectivity are still barking hard at me....I am tired now.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Boeing7E7
Posted 2005-01-13 09:31:05 and read 6128 times.

Open architecture avionics

Existing on the A380, and it's going to fly soon...


So the 380 has an emulator, moving map, a HUD and FLIR... That's news. Took Airbus long enough to get there with open architecture (although their definition of open is clearly different then the one Boeing uses.)

Already done, not in that size I admit, but nothing new. (Beechcraft Starship)

Not even the same. In scale or material.

Now you have no idea what you are talking about, and I actually do...but since you're a pilot, and master all the aircraft systems I guess you know better how the AFDX and Arinc protocols, command words and timings operate.

Really? Have you any idea what Primus Epic can do? Clearly no.

Once again, I try to balance things out on this forum (people should read my signature, and I am an Airbus employee), but people blinded by subjectivity are still barking hard at me....I am tired now.

Balance and an employee...That's kind of like Military Intelligence is it not?

[Edited 2005-01-13 10:01:11]

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Knoxibus
Posted 2005-01-13 10:13:36 and read 6097 times.

Really? Have you any idea what Primus can do? Clearly no.

I don't know what it can do, but Dassault uses it for the 900EX Easy, but looking at the struggle and certification issues they had (they had to postpone the 900EX because of this in 2003), I guess they really went a bit too far and did not realize how complex this would have been.

But I am sure you know what is being done on the A380.

I thought Primus was a flight control system anyway, with the A380 I am talking about ALL avionics and cabin systems being managed by the modular avionics (from FMS to AIMS to OMS to NSS to OIS, etc... etc...)

Moving map yes it will have, with EFB, Emulator are being used for the OIS (I am not dealing with those so can't say for sure), but you are talking about HUDs and FLIR, and I guess you are right about Boeing and Airbus having different conception on these concepts, hell that's what differentiate them for the past 20 years.

I am more talking about the avionics architecture and how it's managed, with FLIR and HUD, you are talking about gizmos.

[Edited 2005-01-13 10:18:16]

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Boeing7E7
Posted 2005-01-13 10:24:56 and read 6087 times.

Architecture management has peaked so to speak (there will be variations, but a majority of the problems have been solved on the military side - commerical application is another thing). Primus Epic is more than flight control, it's whole purpose is to make aircraft autonomous. It is modular and completely configurable based on user needs. Voice activation and terrain mapping is also probable with the 7E7. It's the only avionics system in the world that is set and forget. Pushed far, yes it was. It skipped about two generations.

I'm not trying to argue with you, I'm just pointing out that the 7E7 is a Revolution, not and Evolution as the 380 is. Getting bigger is one thing, changing the face of aircraft forever is another. The 747-E won't be a Revolution either.

This whole thread is kind of whack anyway.


[Edited 2005-01-13 10:29:08]

[Edited 2005-01-13 10:30:33]

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Knoxibus
Posted 2005-01-13 13:00:04 and read 6035 times.

That's true anywhay, I just hope both A/Cs do well in their own niche.

Thanks for the inputs on Primus anyway, I guess I will do a little research on it and try to make out the major differences between it and the IMA of the A380.

I could not find a lot on Honeywell's site though  Insane, I will dig deeper.

Sorry we don't agree on what is a revolution or an evolution, I guess it's almost as subjective as beauty! (something like Hotol might have me marvel at a new aircraft)

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Jet-lagged
Posted 2005-01-13 13:52:22 and read 5990 times.


The A380 will succeed technically.

But I don't think it will be a huge commercial success. Say 500 to 600 total airframes over two decades. That's about 120B in sales, or 12B in profits - roughly equal with development costs.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Zizou
Posted 2005-01-13 14:13:11 and read 5962 times.

One good thing that might come out of the A380 will be cheaper tickets.

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Boeing7E7
Posted 2005-01-13 15:26:24 and read 5906 times.

Here's the brochure on Epic. It looks like they are in the process of updating the site, so info is a bit limited:

http://www.honeywellaes.com/document?docid=doc1861b4d6-fbf56c4845-a024d072ea5a7d3a5aec2ec1b48f0893

This is a package deal for Business and Commuter Aircraft. The commercial side has no info at all. The site used to have a black background, so I don't know what they're doing. Basically, take the 777 avionics and advance it two generations and add useful military applications and you have the 7E7 package.

[Edited 2005-01-13 15:35:10]

Topic: RE: Why Do People Expect The A380 To Fail?
Username: Udo
Posted 2005-01-13 17:45:29 and read 5845 times.

Keep holding onto the hope that the 380 is some kind of technical marvel.

Cannot remember having suggested something like that...in contrast to you, I'm no "believer".


Politics has nothing to do with it. BTW... Airbus needs another loan? I though they were king of the hill. They still need government loans? That's just sad.

It was just the "confident style" of your expression which reminded me of "White House talk". I didn't refer to political topics directly.


So why do you need $1 Billion in launch aid for the 350 then? Can't go it alone or just sold 370 birds because you undercut the competition so badly to make that number that you don't have your own funds? I mean, if I had those kind of numbers I think I'd be able to invest in quite a few new aircraft.

No matter if they can afford it by their own or not - if you can get additional money, why not take it? Use all advantages you have in order to succeed. If it is justified or not is another question.  Wink/being sarcastic


Regards
Udo


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/