Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus A380  
User currently offlineAa777dr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (15 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1231 times:

I am sorry people but that name doesn't have any appeal what-so-ever.

O.K. let me try to repeat it to myself:
Airbus A380. I don't think so. Airbus lovers no offense o.k. please, I beg of you don't take this the wrong way. This is just me expressing my thoughts about the hedious name they've chosen for such a magnificent airplane.

P.S. - I am a boeing fan.

7 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineDelta763ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (15 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1179 times:

I respect you because you are a Boeing fan, me too, big time and i completely dissagree with the A380. To me it looks like a flying aparment building.

User currently offlineFlashmeister From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2939 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (15 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1164 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'd sure be nervous flying on a plane that large with such an illogical FBW philosophy...

For me anyway, thumbs-down...

User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13756 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (15 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1151 times:

As in my post that was deleted. It's tacky. A3XX comes into mind much more quickly than A380. For one we all know and love it as A3XX and not A380, and secondly, when you think of why you name was chosen, you need to thing "Oh A340, A3XX. Twice A340. Hmm. A380. Oooh donuts!" While A3XX seems special which it is.

Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineLeigh pilgrim From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2000, 392 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (15 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1132 times:

Someone reassure me this will not put BOEING in the dark, after all i preffere boeing aircraft to airbus

User currently offlineModesto2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2898 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (15 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1114 times:

I don't want to jump to conclusions but I must ask: why the "8"?

User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (15 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1083 times:

Perhaps they chose "8" for the same reason it's popular with ice hockey players - it's the "biggest" number visually, and obviously to indicate this plane is not just a continuation of their existing portfolio.

I'm surprised at how elaborate belief structures people are willing to support just to make the A380 (almost wrote A3xx!) look doomed. It's just a big plane. There are many routes in the world with sufficiently heavy traffic. Flying it is both cheaper and a bit comfier (in economy, a lot comfier in biz) than other planes. Airlines are obviously interested.

Some think BWB is Boeing's answer to A380. Unfortunately we aren't going to get rides in blended-wing a/c for a while yet. Both Boeing and Airbus have been looking at these designs for decades, yet there is no product on market. How would it be certified? How does it behave at high and low speed? How much more expensive is it to r&d and build? How fast does it go? There are some setbacks, for instance the A380 can be stretched and shrunk at relatively low expense, whereas a BWB family would be prohibitively expensive. Designing one model costs more than designing one conventional model. Subsequent conventional derivatives are cheap, but BWB derivatives are still very expensive.

Mayhap we'll see them when aircraft switch to hydrogen fuel.

User currently offlineCAETravlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 922 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (15 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1080 times:

I think the term A380 is going to have to grow on everyone just like the term A3XX became familiar to us for a long time. It is a designation that was chosen, and that is all. I am personally a Boeing fan, and do not believe that this is by any means going to buy Airbus total airliner dominance or mean any kind of end for Boeing. It may or may not mean some sort of dominance for Airbus in one particular category of aircraft. Its profitability for Airbus will only be determined years down the road.

A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her. - W.C. Fields
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...
BA Airbus A380 With New Olympic Logo posted Tue Jun 19 2007 00:01:18 by Keesje
Airbus A380 - Emirates Orders 8 More Frames. posted Mon Jun 18 2007 12:13:42 by WINGS
Airbus A380 - EA Ships First Production Engine. posted Thu Jun 7 2007 12:37:42 by WINGS
Airbus A380 - SQ Painting Completed. posted Thu May 10 2007 10:00:03 by WINGS
Airbus A380 MSN010, MSN011 & So On? posted Thu May 10 2007 04:11:24 by AeroplaneFreak
Airbus A380: EA GP7200 Acheives Easa Certification posted Fri Apr 27 2007 12:18:32 by WINGS
Airbus A380 - SQ Cabin Furnishing Completed. posted Fri Apr 6 2007 13:45:56 by WINGS
Airbus A380 - EA Tests Reach Half Way Mark. posted Sat Mar 31 2007 12:28:22 by WINGS
Airbus A380 VIP 'Flying Palace' Interior Unveiled posted Mon Mar 12 2007 19:36:30 by Clickhappy
NY Airbus A380 Welcome Gathering posted Fri Mar 2 2007 01:40:10 by LAXspotter