A thread that involves Boeing and
Airbus has managed to stay good-natured past the tenth post!
I was careful in the original thread not to make out that Boeing ever said there was no
market for Ultra-Large Aircraft, they didn't. They simply said that
-They didn't think there was a large enough market to make any such programme worthwhile (Profitable) for Boeing and by definition there was insufficient demand for the 2 competing products of Airbus and Boeing.
I originally took Boeing's stance;
"Look at the Atlantic, the sky's full of 767s flying between secondary cities, the same will happen in the Pacific with A340/777s"
Now it seems that for some airports like LHR, there is basically no room for many more flights, T5 will increase capacity but not movements -> LARGER AIRCRAFT.
Asian Trunk-Routes (Where are all the 777-300 customers?) may well need larger aircraft.
Also, on some very long routes, replacing a B747-400 with 2 B777s would provide too much
extra capacity, and the airlines would prefer to use a single A3XX for more modest growth (Flight Int. last week had a compuer image of the A3XX in Qantas livery) There is are also some questions over ETOPS over the Pacific - closure of USAF diversionary fields, and sutiability of some of the remote airports (ie Where do 300 pax from a diverted 777 stay, eat, how do they keep warm/cool?) that don't apply on Atlantic routes.