Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A380 Replacement  
User currently offlineEspion007 From Denmark, joined Dec 2003, 1691 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6687 times:

What do you think,35 years from 2006,will replace the a380?

triple decker maybe?


Snakes on a Plane!
52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineThrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2688 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6622 times:

If the MTOW issue gets solved, then yes.


Fly one thing; Fly it well
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 960 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6615 times:

Probably a more thorough integration of mass transit, trains, high speed rail, ect. As the cost of maglev drops, I think it will begin to replace many of the functions of the 737/A320, 757, 7E7SR. At 350mph you arrive at your destination without a noticable delay relative to jet travel, and a train can carry a far greater numer of passengers.

To answer your question, no passenger aircraft will be larger than the A380 IMO.


User currently offline4everRC From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 325 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6609 times:

In 2041, everyone with A380 will replace them with DC9s bought from the NW operating fleet.



Nobody served our republic like Republic!
User currently offlineNantoine From France, joined Apr 2004, 36 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6595 times:

My guess is that a family of Blended-Wing-Body aircraft will be operating some time before 2025.

User currently offlineGLAGAZ From UK - Scotland, joined Feb 2004, 1982 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6589 times:

How about small supersonic jets that can hover at their gate. So instead of taking up more ground space for gates you just build say 4 storey gates with a/c hovering above each other. Would also eliminate the need for runways, so I don't like my idea as i like these big beasts landing and taking off with amazing power but It's the first thing that came to mind so take it or leave it....  Smile


Neutrality means that u don't really care cos the struggle goes on even when ur not there, blind and unaware
User currently offlineUltrapig From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 581 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6614 times:

Based on my perspective of the curent world situation the 390 will be replace by push carts and dugout cannoes after world war III

User currently offlineAl319 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6507 times:

How about the SONIC CRUISER lol


“atom celled…jet propelled”
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16991 posts, RR: 67
Reply 8, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6436 times:

It's hard to imagine a practical tube with wings larger than the 389 since we are nearing the limits of CURRENT infrastructure. Of course, this was probably said of the 747 in 1970.

35 years on, all bets are off. DfwRevolution has a good point about trains. Even without maglev, Europe has seen a huge renaissance for trains in the last 20 years. If the trains do 500-600 km/h+ planes will be outcompeted on price and time on segments up to 5-6 hours, not to mention the fact that a train station can be built in the center of a city. This gets us into the crucial US transcontinental range, a hugely important market that would make the investment in these technologies worth it.

For the long haul over 6 hours, someone might come up with practical suborbital transport. 60 minutes from London to Australia. Let's hope.




"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineAirways6max From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6385 times:

I don't think anything much bigger than the A380, but maybe a double-deck version of Boeing's shelved Trans-Sonic Cruiser.

User currently offline22right From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 420 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6307 times:

Good one Ultrapig!  Wink/being sarcastic

I highly doubt the A380 will be replaced by anything exciting. It will probably be yet another generic looking multi-engine giant with operational efficiencies up the wazoo! (I mean the 757/767/777 series hardly invokes the same "gasp" that perhaps a 727 or a 747 do, for most people)

Unfortunately, the glory days of aircraft design are far behind us (I am guessing they were the 50s thru' the early 70's). I mean looks-wise, how different is an A340 produced compared to the B707... if anything the 707 looks cooler! I maintain that there have been no significant innovations in commercial aircraft design (meaning aircraft shape, style, etc) in the last 30 years (whatever has been has been behind the scenes in the electronics, engine technology, etc).

And that may be because we have reached the point where we already know the basic shape, size, etc parameters needed to create an efficient/effective commercial aircraft. There is no further point in deviating from that anymore. A sad but true artifact of getting good at something very quickly.



"I never apologize! I am sorry, but that's the way it is!" - Homer Simpson
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 960 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6289 times:

I'm going to give one more plug regarding maglev

Popular Science did a really crappy, IMO, rendition of a trans-atlantic maglev system, but that's another story. However, if a single maglev artery were to link JFK with LHR, trans-Atlantic jet travel would be reduced into JFK/LHR feeders, while a few P2P would be served with smaller aircraft. A sample itenerary might be-

DFW-JFK onboard 7E7SR
JFK-LHR onboard trans-Atlantic maglev
LHR-AMS oboard 7E7SR

Later the same maglev track could be stretched to LHR-CDG and JFK-OHR untill an arterial system of maglev links North America to Europe. At the same time, an artery through the Bering Straits could link North America to Asia. Air travel would become secondary to maglev, with the purpose of feeding these rail heads. The obvious site for rail-air integration would be beneath or within current airports.

All my humble opinion ofcourse.


User currently offlineORDagent From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 823 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6216 times:

The concept of high speed trains is a wonderful thing for densely populated areas like Europe. I have taken the German ICE several times and with the exception of the scenery it is indeed like flying. ie:quiet,smooth as a baby's bottom and FAST! My only concern is the new crop of LCCs like EasyJet that could bleed traffic off of the trains. I'm not a big one on taxes but the German idea of taxing by the amount of pollution created per pax makes some sense since trains are significantly cleaner at least on shorter intra European services. Of course I'm still a fanatic for things with wings but those modern trains really are spectacular. Just look at AB) (FRA / FRF / EDDF), Germany">FRA. That incredible ICE station just a jump from the gates to the snazziest non winged travel on the planet. That will be the waive of the future.


User currently offlineNetdhaka From Bangladesh, joined Feb 2004, 183 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5971 times:

triple decker maybe?

A380 IS a triple decker, if you count the first deck that contains cargo, fuel tank, wheels and other goodies.


User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2042 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 5825 times:

BEAM ME UP, SCOTTY! ... replaced the 7e7, too.  Big grin


I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineMY7E7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5772 times:

The Matrix, all we need is a reliable cell phone provider to find the exit again.


I'm not always right but that's no reason to insult me
User currently offlineJoleb From Belgium, joined Oct 2003, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 5580 times:

A380 will never leave ground thats why immeadiatly people will buy more 747

User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16991 posts, RR: 67
Reply 17, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5551 times:

A380 will never leave ground thats why immeadiatly people will buy more 747

What are your sources?  Big grin



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineN754pr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5334 times:

idiots, you got to love them  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 850 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (10 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5093 times:

I think Boeing´s BWB w/ 1000 pax, is the plane to fly.......in 15-20 years!
IMO 35 years its spaaaace all the way  Big thumbs up

Michael//SE



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineACAfan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 710 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (10 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4974 times:

In order to see the next 35 years, look at the past 35 years.

What has changed? Fuselages have been the same, engines have been improved/reduced, economics of air travel have become paramount. pax comfort has been refined.

My prediction: An twinjet version of the A380

Regardless, planes are too big, and I follow the fragmentation argument. MCI-MUC-HYD on the 7E7



Freddie Laker ... May be at peace with his maker ... But he is a persona non grata ... with IATA
User currently offlineTriStarEnvy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2265 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (10 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4940 times:

Wait! If we're talking some for of rail mass transit, now... will we be forced by all the changes to go from "A.net" to "MT.net"? (Mass Transit)...

I can see it now.....
The HR v. M fights... (Heavy rail vs. Maglev)
Posts about NWA DC-9's being used as dining cars in 2020
What's your favorite locomotive?
Noisy couplers on trains.
Worst paint schemes for trains...

 Smile





If you don't stand for SOMETHING, you'll fall for ANYTHING.
User currently offlineACAfan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 710 posts, RR: 6
Reply 22, posted (10 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4897 times:

Monorail is the best rail system bar none. Heavy rail is expensive, dangerous, and unattractive. Light rail is not an alternative to driving. Subways are decent but expensive.

Monorails look better
Monorails are inexpensive to construct
Monorails are easy to construct
Monorails are the the only train system that is profitable
Monorails are the most efficient
Monorails are the most reliable
Monorails are the safest. No colllisions. No derailments. Not a single accident in its history of use.

http://www.monorails.org/

Intra city: monorail
Inter city: maglev monorail



Freddie Laker ... May be at peace with his maker ... But he is a persona non grata ... with IATA
User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (10 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4833 times:

Planes will be fueled by Hydrogen in the future.

ACAfan great signature, i cant imagine what influenced you  Yeah sure


User currently offlineACAfan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 710 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (10 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4615 times:

Roberta:

My signature was intended to be a mockery of yours...
I suppose mockery is indeed a form of flattery!

 Smile/happy/getting dizzy



Freddie Laker ... May be at peace with his maker ... But he is a persona non grata ... with IATA
25 Greg : A couple people have been killed by the monorail at Disneyland...so you can't say 'not a single accident'.. Of course, climbing ONTO the track was not
26 Planemaker : DfwRevolution: "I'm going to give one more plug regarding maglev." On land, yes - the TGV virtually killed Paris-Lyon air traffic for example. And the
27 AirframeAS : Airlines dont look 35 years into the future. Hell, they dont even look into 5 years from now either.
28 XFSUgimpLB41X : Only at airliners net does someone ask what is going to replace a plane before its first flight. I know the answer... the DC-9.
29 Post contains images RockyRacoon : I, too, think we'll be seeing a BWB aircraft sometime in the future. Seems like that natural progression to me. peace
30 9V-SPF : Definitely quadruple decker DC-9s. LH will be the launch customer and install 30" PTVs on those planes. Afterwards, they will be taken over by Air Fra
31 Heavierthanair : G'day how about an advanced version of the cable train as a people mover. The trains could run in tunnels when overland transport is not practical, ma
32 N6376m : This is a ridiculous thread. In the 1960's nobody could even imagine what airtravel would be like in 30 years. There's a common theme amongst futurist
33 AvObserver : I heartily agree with N6736m. Popular Science magazine so often publishes 'future of air and other travel' articles and too often it seems they don't
34 DfwRevolution : I heartily agree with N6736m. Popular Science magazine so often publishes 'future of air and other travel' articles and too often it seems they don't
35 JBirdAV8r : Probably a more thorough integration of mass transit, trains, high speed rail, ect. As the cost of maglev drops, I think it will begin to replace many
36 Planemaker : "In reality, the floating superstructures like those used in deep sea oil exploration would be a much more feasable solution. Basically, a series of s
37 DfwRevolution : It wouldn't even be remotely economically feasible. And I suppose a triple-decker is? With a project of such a grand scale, your goal is to break-even
38 Thrust : As I have said before in this post, not only would a triple-decker be remotely economically feasible, how you could get the MTOW to fit in to the stan
39 Starlionblue : I can't believe I'm still the only one to mention suborbitals. After all, that's a technology we almost have today.
40 Planemaker : And I suppose a triple-decker is? With a project of such a grand scale, your goal is to break-even over a century, rather than the 10-15 year product
41 Canoecarrier : I have to agree with Starlionblue, what happens with air travel in the future will be driven by engine technology. If an efficient and reliable scramj
42 Motorhussy : Unless we find an economically competitive fossil-fuel alternative that performs for aircraft, we could find ourselves in an inter-continental transpo
43 Zak : i see the a380 and 7e7 as last of their breed. planes last 20 or so years and i am sure the doctrine will have changed then. my guess is that most con
44 Canoecarrier : I highly doubt that travel will take a step backward, regardless of diminishing fossil fuel reserves. We've heard they were going to dry up 10, 20, 30
45 N6376m : Trains are a great answer for Europe given the relatively small geographic proximity of the major cities. However, in the US, the train will be widely
46 Adria : "Airlines dont look 35 years into the future. Hell, they dont even look into 5 years from now either."...... Well if airlines in America do it like th
47 Starlionblue : Along with the increase in price of fossil fuels, another trend is ever better virtual and comminications technology. This is already leading to a dec
48 Post contains images 22right : In reply #32, N6773m wrote: > Most of the people who will design the A380 replacement > are either watching Sesame Street or still are sperm in >their
49 Boysteve : What a stupid question this is! The A380 isn't airborne yet and people are talking about what replaces it in 2040! Imagine people predicting Concorde
50 AvObserver : I hear that Boysteve. Unless someone here is a gypsy fortune-teller with a crystal ball, it's impossible to fully speculate on what could replace the
51 Ken777 : I think the price of oil is going to be a major factor. If it is roughly $100 - $150 in today's dollar then the airline industry will be in a terrible
52 Post contains images Lehpron : What does "impossible to fully speculate" mean? Dude, we don't need prophets or proof to speculate; it's called gossip, it's called guessing. Who care
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Link To A380 Type Certificate Data Sheet posted Tue Dec 12 2006 22:56:44 by Dougloid
A380 Noise Levels posted Tue Dec 12 2006 18:40:30 by Aeroman444
A380 Gets Easa Approval posted Tue Dec 12 2006 12:36:46 by LHStarAlliance
IHT: Airbus Saga:How Hubris/haste Snarled The A380 posted Mon Dec 11 2006 18:41:34 by N328KF
A380 MSN007 F-WWSD Re-registered? posted Sun Dec 10 2006 15:20:32 by Petera380
The Possible A380 Destinations! posted Sun Dec 10 2006 01:47:10 by B773ER
SIA Looks To More 77Ws To Cover A380 Delays? posted Sat Dec 9 2006 22:42:29 by Kaitak
A380-900 Worth To Develop? posted Sat Dec 9 2006 21:00:10 by LHStarAlliance
A380 Thai : First 3 European Routes posted Fri Dec 8 2006 11:42:48 by FCKC
What Is Airbus Doing To The A380?!? posted Fri Dec 8 2006 09:11:28 by Baron95