Here's a link to the rest of the article:
doesn't even have any commercial 747 flights, so the chance of an airline using an A380 isn't very likely. The Cost/Benefit ratio is probably too high to make the upgrades worthwhile in the near to mid-term future.
It smacks of protectionism to me
What interest would the GM
have in protecting Boeing from Airbus? Atlanta employs very few, if any, Boeing workers in the area, so there is nothing to protect.
IMO it's childish and he thinks from 12 till noon.
I see nothing childish about making a business decision based on hard data. Although whining that an airport won't make upgrades for a plane it won't service in the foreseeable future does sound childish to me.
If the airport is maxed out already, are they happy with zero growth or are they going to increase capacity in some way.
The airport isn't maxed out. But yes, it is expanding. The 2740m fifth runway under construction will open next year and the East Int'l terminal will open in a few years afterward, so capacity will greatly increase.
Anyway, I would have thought that ATL
was already up to 380 specs. Concourse E is designed handle several 747s side by side, so passenger flow though the concourse isn't an issue, although perhaps there isn't enough seating area at each gate for 555 passengers so some interior renovation would be needed. The article states the problem at the gates is lack of a second jetway, so loading and unloading would take forever. I would think only 2 or 3 gates need to fitted with a 2nd jetway- something they could build along with the rest of the East terminal.
As for the taxiway problem, how much width does the 380 require? And how does that compare to the 747? (edit: Oh, I see, it's a congestion issue since you will have three runways' worth of plane traffic converging in the south airfield)
Too bad ATL
wouldn't see the 380 anyway, I'd love to watch one of those badboys land right over me
[Edited 2005-02-01 17:25:58]
[Edited 2005-02-01 17:26:47]