The A350?

[Craig.]

why is the 7E7 a waste of money? its replacing many aircraft that will need replacing. as for anti-airbus, as i said i have legitimate reasons, your just as anti boeing, may i ask why

[ATI_7500]

Legitimate reasons...just because your dad didn't get a job there.

And why the antipathy towards the A-350?? This will be just an up-to-date version of the A-330 and no revolution like the A-380.
Bringing a product up-to-date by slapping some new features onto an existing platform is very common these days. Just look at your PC. The ATI 9800pro, for example, is just an upgraded 9700pro, which was revolutionary at its time.

And Airbus is the first company to do that in great style in the aircraft manufacturing sector.  So the uproar is completely injustified...

What were you expecting? A completely new medium-sized Airbus appearing out of nowhere?

[Craig.]

Legitimate reasons...just because your dad didn't get a job there

had a job due to start then it was taken away, technically he was fired before his first day without a good reason. lost a lot of money.  

And why the antipathy towards the A-350?? This will be just an up-to-date version of the A-330 and no revolution like the A-380.  
Bringing a product up-to-date by slapping some new features onto an existing platform is very common these days. Just look at your PC. The ATI 9800pro, for example, is just an upgraded 9700pro, which was revolutionary at its time.

the differance being alot of the new technology for planes cant just be put onto an airframe like parts to a computer. I dont really care at all about the A350, i just like how much of a rush they made to change from a, "we wont be making a competitor to the 7E7" to "we need this new plane to stay competitive"

[ATI_7500]

I wouldn't wonder if Airbus was more successful with that strategy.

[forfun]

I don't like either company,

Boeing's bloody unrealistic, and have been living off the 747 for 50 years now. They announce this new "Dreamliner" and have the most unrealistic mock ups of interior i'v ever seen. They also fail to correct older aircrafts problems.

Airbus isn't much better, they announce this bloody A380 and nobody cares, i would rather not be in an airliner with 555 other people thank you very much. As for the A350, well woopydedoo. Aren't Airbus just fantastic! Another long range wide body, whew, never saw that coming

I think the future of air travel is in regional airliners and the occasional 7E7 type thing. Airbus are just lost, at least Boeing know what's gonna earn money and not.

Embraer all the way.  

BTW :

i didnt like the A320 which was awfully noisey

That isn't true. I live on a hill and the flight path of our int airport comes right past our house, and i'v been living here for ten years. Now, Air NZ have been flying boeing 733's here for quite some time and they are quite noisy, especially when they're taking off.
Air NZ bought 16 Airbus a320's a couple of years ago, and we now have many come here a day, i swear they are so much queiter than the Boeings. Especially on approach, it's a swooshing noise rather than a rumble. When they take off they are quite loud i admit, but not as loud as the 733's.

[Hagar]

I still don't understand what all the fuss is about or why people get so passionate about companies they know very little about. Both Airbus & Boeing (alphabetical order in case someone takes offence ) are huge companies employing 1,000s of people. I assume their research departments know what they're doing or they wouldn't have been successful or still in business. That business happens to be building passenger aeroplanes for mass transport. There's only so many possible variations of what is basically an aluminium tube with wings. With modern computer design anything intended for the same purpose is bound to look very similar. Unless you're specifically interested in these things it's often very difficult to tell one company's product from another. I reckon to be pretty good at aircraft recognition but, with a few exceptions, most modern jet airliners look the same to me. This also applies to cars as I have little interest in either.

Most of what you, as an ordinary member of the general public, know about any new aircraft in the pipeline is based on publicity & company propaganda intended to throw competitors (each other) offtrack. This often has very little bearing on reality. With Airbus & Boeing it unfortunately seems to have turned into a slanging match.

Will these new designs be successful? As I said before, time will tell. Nobody dreamed the 747 would revolutionise mass air travel or still be carrying 1,000s of passengers every day almost 35 years after its first commercial flight. The company went to considerable financial risks to produce it & the gamble paid off handsomely. This is not always the case & they could have so easily failed. I think there's room for both companies & wish them both success.

[quote]They also fail to correct older aircrafts problems.

[Woodlouse2002]

Once the A380 gets off the ground (pun half intended) and airlines start to buy it I think it will do Airbus very proud. I feel that in 15 or 20 years time it will be well on the way to replacing many 747 fleets. Why? Because it has the potential to carry more people at a more efficient price. The more people you can cram on an aircraft means the more money you can make from that plane, it also means you can have less flights running because you're moving more people with each trip. Airlines will always go for the most efficient way of transporting people so if the Airbus has the potential to carry more than the 747 more economically then of course the Airbus will be the eventual winner.

[Craig.]

generally the passenger numbers for the A380 are not much more than the 747-400. However wait until some of the asian and indian carriers get hold of it and configure it to single class only. 690 to 750 wouldnt be out of the question.

[Hagar]

The main problem I see with operating the A380 will be its size, extra weight & handling the large number of passengers + baggage it could theoretically carry at either end of the journey. The latter has always been a problem with the 747, especially when several arrive or leave around the same time from the same terminal. This will almost certainly involve redesigning airports to cope with it. Some might not wish to or be unable to afford it. This will have a big influence on the A380's success.

You can improve the aircraft as much as you like but travelling to & from the airport has always been the worst problem, particularly in the UK. I don't see that getting any better any time soon. Then there's the inevitable delay before boarding & after leaving the aircraft. This takes longer now than ever before with increased security measures.

[Craig.]

Hi Doug, A recent survey showed only a few airports were ready for the A380, i know memphis was 1, jfk might have been another. Others have been working as fast as possible to get their facilities ready. Dual jet bridges are being designed for it and the taxiway and parking spaces widend. I dont even want to guess what airports will have to do in terms of Immigration, after a recent trip through Charlotte, it took over an hour for 230 passengers to be processed from an A330, so god only knows what double that would take.

[forfun]

Because it has the potential to carry more people at a more efficient price

But what youhave to understand is, these days, you don't have 555 people wanting to go to the same place and the same time. Instead, you have these people all going to different places or the same place at a different time. That is why i think the A380 won't be as much of a success as the 747. Because back in those days, There were less airports so more people wanted to travel the same route.

[Woodlouse2002]

The point is people will take whats open to them. To say 550 people don't want to go from say Heathrow to New York is rediculous. You have a bigger aircraft you have fewer flights, so more people to go on each flight. And so you can have less aircraft, which uses less fuel and you get a huge saving on running costs.

[Hagar]

You have a bigger aircraft you have fewer flights, so more people to go on each flight. And so you can have less aircraft, which uses less fuel and you get a huge saving on running costs.

Don't forget that, in theory anyway, less flights means less effect on the environment. There is a growing anti-airliner lobby in the UK because of the supposed pollution cased by jet aircraft. There are many well-known politicians among them who can in turn influence their colleagues. In some debates I've heard recently many of these people would love to get all aircraft banned. As this is not practical & would obviously be unpopular with some of their supporters they are suggesting huge taxes to make flying more expensive & therefore less attractive to the travelling public. This is the last thing the industry needs right now.

[Woodlouse2002]

After being able to cross the atlantic in 8 hours for so long people won't be willing to go back to the week or so it took in the Liners.

I have a feeling the A380 will end up dominating the Atlantic and Asian routes. A lot of people wanting to travel a long way.

[Craig.]

Personally i think these people are really grasping a straws. Planes are in general today, more enviromentally friendly and quieter than ever. These are the same people i guess who rumble down the motorway in their caravans going on some holiday in wales. Just because they dont wanna go to some exotic location, why should they ruin the experiance for the rest of us.