Speedbird777 From Bangladesh, joined Jul 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Posted (14 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1917 times:
I have been reading the posts about the A3XX recently and people seem to have very mixed views about the viability of this aircraft. With the announcement at the Farnborough Air Show yesterday that the national carrier of the United Arab Emirates has become the first customer for the aircraft with a firm order for five, it seems a good time to ask people what their concerns about the aircraft are. It could just be the old US v Europe syndrome but I don't think that is the whole story. Are there worries about the flying abilities of the aircraft? Will runway and terminal modifications be made? Will the projected rise in passenger traffic justify its existence?
Boeing also announced yesterday that the further development of the 747-400 is now a strong possibility, with a redesigned interior similar to the 777.
777x From United States of America, joined Dec 2014, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (14 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1698 times:
I don't think anyone (excepting some of the more childish members of this board) has any doubts about it's ability to fly and to fly safely. Concerns mainly focus on the financial viability of the project and what it could do to both Airbus and Boeing if it's successful or unsuccessful.
Supporters of the A3XX basically say that a/c of this size will be required to meet forcasted growth in air travel, holding the view that travel will continue to operate through mega hubs, thereby supporting VLA.
Detractors say that increased market fragmentation will lead to more point to point flights that bypass mega hubs and reduce the need for VLA.
I don't know the answer, but I lean towards the second view - with the proviso that a new ATC system will be required in this senario in the not too distant future to cope with the additional traffic.
Sea_Tac2000 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1673 times:
777x is right-- no doubts about it's abitlity to fly etc. The only thing I see is that this so called new level of passenger comfort etc, that I'm not buying until I see an airlines specific configuration. Planes are crowded already, a post above refering to a ridiculous configuration of a 777 @ 3x4x3 which is packing it nicely, comes to mind. Do any of you think that an airline will try to stick as many passangers as they can in there!? Maybe at first it will have lounges etc whatever else they say they can have but the same was with the 747s but not anymore.
So that's my only worry really. Airlines taking advantage of this titanic of the skies to stuff as many of us in there as possible.
Tailscraper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (14 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1665 times:
Agreed. Notice Emirates has not mentioned a word about lounges, gyms etc. I wonder why...cause it ain't gonna happen?
EK gets hype and awards for it's superb service. Not it's configurations. I have flown all classes on EK, and none of them are actually better than BA's First or Club, comfort-wise. And BA's Y class is more comfortable than EK's. Service is more consistently high-standard with EK though.
Anyway, I digress by a large margin. I think the truth is, no-one knows whether we need VLA's just yet, or in the near future, but ready or not, Big Mother Airbus is on her way...
AC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (14 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1645 times:
As to technical aspects, no problem, it's not an easy task but it's all very much within the realm of current technology, it will fly and it should be fairly economical in terms of operating costs.
As to airport services and equipment, runways, taxiways, and so on should be currently adaquete. The ramp space required to park these monsters also shouldn't be too much of a problem. Airport facilities themselves probably need fewer changes now for the A3XX than they did for the 747's, but double jetways like already exist at some airports would probably be really needed, perhaps with a slight redesign so that the second loading bridge could reach the upper deck. The biggest problem I can foresee is how to get the freight off the top deck of a freighter version- will it have internal elevators (heavy) or will new ramp equipment (pallet loaders, specifically) be needed? But that's not really too terrible overall in terms of infrastructure changes.
As to the sales question, I don't really know the answer. I see fragmentation working to a point, but it won't eliminate the need for large aircraft. I see Airbus as selling in a market that has an existing demand they hope to see grow. Also, there is a real need for large aircraft at some airlines, just don't expect to see it parked on every ramp around.
As to the question of comforts, no question in my mind that we'll see a new level of luxury- except for one thing- it'll probably only be for first class passengers. They won't change the standard of service for economy passengers very much.
Speedbird777 From Bangladesh, joined Jul 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1620 times:
With airlines already 'packing them in' do people think that the same will happen to the A3XX? If so, the whole concept of this monster aircraft becomes rather obscene. I agree that the idea of lounges and gyms is probably pie in the sky except for the few. The rest of us will no doubt continue to be herded into 'cattle class'.