Nsfguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (8 years 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1333 times:
Please don't think I'm bashing the 380, personally I hope it makes it. However like the bigger 747 said to be coming out, how will the comfort factor and ease of customer use turn out to be? Used to be quick and simple to board a DC-8 or 707, then got a little more jammed with the wide body tri jets on runs like the "Laker Skytrain" and the crush became really unbearible on the 747 economy with the other 390 people all being checked in by the same number as with the 707's.... about 6-7 agents! Imagine 600 suffering souls trying to mount a mega jet! Mix in all the hassels of TSA, oversized carry on arguments, and the like.... What a pain in the asp this could turn out to be! and wating for your one piece of checked so you can get to the front of the line and clear customs to dodge the crush, while 1500 bags have to go around first? Please for the love of God tell an old man how this is going to be smooth.
DL021 From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1291 times:
I wonder what preparations the airlines have made for the simultaneous checking in, baggage inspection and boarding of 3 or 4 A-380s at JFK or CDG at once?
Or for them coming in.
It makes no sense to have these aircraft running if they cannot handle the influx and the airlines know it, so does anyone here know what measures have been taken to prevent bottlenecks from arising?
I am wondering about the gates right now. That'll be a madhouse.
Sabena332 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1281 times:
Quoting Nsfguy (Thread starter): Please for the love of God tell an old man how this is going to be smooth.
Again, Corsair is operating 747's with 380 seats since many years to/from several airports! Has anyone ever asked a similar question about the dispatch of such a flight?
These "The A 380 is too big and carries too many passengers" threads are becoming really boring!
Tackleberry970 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 67 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1242 times:
You make some good points, but I have read where the airports and airlines are having to seriously adjust to the A380. It can only be served by select airports, occupy select gates at those airports and I am certain the airlines will work to get the fastest turn around time they can.
I know that most airports will be serving the A380 with 2 airbridges. One for the lower deck, one for the upper deck. That will basically speed the loading/unloading process greatly.
As for check in and baggage claim, I have not really heard too much about those issues. But I have to assume that they will alter those processes to accommodate the 80.
However, something to remember is that the airport authority, itself, is the ultimate entity responsible for the logistical handling of the A380. The airlines are only the airport authority's lessee.
AADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 1831 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1183 times:
At least initially, the A380 will be quite comfortable, except for Emerates low yield flights between the Middle East and South Asia. Do you think Singapore is going to have crappy economy class?
Since 747-400s are available cheap, lower cost airlines would use them and pack them with tiny seats, while the A380s will be flagship products for the high margin airlines that are ordering them. As more airlines acquire them, they will become hardly different than a 747 now.
Lnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1588 posts, RR: 17 Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1007 times:
Can I ask a question?
Why is it such a hard thing to believe that in the very near future, we can't see that this will be a necessity?
There was no need for a HUGE plane when the 747 came around.. Boeing's research and market teams determined that the best way to move many passengers would be to build a very large plane, bigger than was currently available...
Airbus isn't doing anything new here -- they're just expanding on an already factual set of circumstances. They haven't re-invented the wheel here folks.
Glom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2803 posts, RR: 10 Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 932 times:
Quoting Nsfguy (Reply 6): 580 seats on a 743? you must be on acid!
A 773 can get 550 in high density configuration, but these are for domestic. It's the congestion in immigration/customs etc that is causing the extra concern.
The argument is similar to "What's use in a CATIIIc landing system without a CATIIIc taxi system?" However, I believe that this is a much more manageable issue.
CM767 From Panama, joined Dec 2004, 639 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 905 times:
Quoting Glom (Reply 8): A 773 can get 550 in high density configuration, but these are for domestic. It's the congestion in immigration/customs etc that is causing the extra concern.
Would be good if any one with experience on this flights can tell us, how is the time to embark / disembark on one of the 777 doing the domestic flights in Japan. I am curious also, if they use one or two jet bridges for them.
The above will gave us an idea of what to expect with the A380, personally I believe that if facilities are well organized there should not be a problem.
Davejondi From United States of America, joined May 2005, 19 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 881 times:
I think the biggest problem the airports face in accommodating the 380 is the needed changes to current infrastructure (i.e. widening and reinforcing taxiways and ramp areas). Once those problems are solved the other ones will be fixed as well.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12707 posts, RR: 80 Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 833 times:
Look at Japan, who have had domestic 747's on internal routes for over 30 years, what are they? 550 seaters at least?
How do they cope, even allowing that many pax won't have luggage in the hold.
But they do, and have done for decades.
Glom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2803 posts, RR: 10 Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 823 times:
Quoting GDB (Reply 13): Look at Japan, who have had domestic 747's on internal routes for over 30 years,
The luggage burden is less and their is no immigration to worry about. Not a totally valid comparison. I think it is these things that are causing the concern, not so much the problems with boarding etc.
Why is it such a hard thing to believe that in the very near future, we can't see that this will be a necessity?
There was no need for a HUGE plane when the 747 came around.. Boeing's research and market teams determined that the best way to move many passengers would be to build a very large plane, bigger than was currently available...
Airbus isn't doing anything new here -- they're just expanding on an already factual set of circumstances. They haven't re-invented the wheel here folks.
ExFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9 Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 689 times:
My main worry is baggage claim...the check-in and customs/immigration problems can be handled by simply adding more lanes.
But unless they develop some method of dispersing the bags across multiple carousels, trying to find your bags is going to be a real PITA.
How does Corsair do it now with those sardine-can 747s?
Or do passengers just suffer through?
I'm guessing the latter, as I'm presuming that Corsair is some sort of discount carrier. (Maybe an unfair presumption on my part...I'm basing that on the the incredibly bad English version of their website - they couldn't pay a college student a few hundred Euros to clean up some of the borderline "Engrish" a little there? And I sure hope that "Grand Large Class" sounds better in French...)
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
, 11433 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1588 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2803 posts, 
From Panama, joined Dec 2004, 639 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
