When is the A380-800...

[vololiberista]

I don't really think it is right to say the 787 is a "better" a/c than the A380. They are completely different in design and aimed at completely different parts of the market.  I would say though that in my opinion airbus wings are largely more efficient based on experience with Caravelle, VC10, Trident Concorde etc

I don't think the A380 will bomb. It is what airlines want. They are just pissed off withi having to wait and therefore having to spend money now that they didn't want to.

What if the 787 bombs!!!!!!! After all it IS still a "dream"!!!!!!!!!!!  :)
Vololiberista

[C]

After all it IS still a "dream"!!!!!!!!!!!  :)

...Liner...

[vololiberista]

After all it IS still a "dream"!!!!!!!!!!!  :)

...Liner...

do you mean as in "Bin!!"  :)
Vololiberista

[dcunning30]

I don't think the A380 will bomb. It is what airlines want. They are just pissed off withi having to wait and therefore having to spend money now that they didn't want to.

Timing is evrything in such a competative market.  The delays are causing airlines to constantly have to redo their strategic planning.  It's a pretty safe bet that Airbus is actively making concessions to the Airlines because of the delays.  According to the last statistics I've seen, Airbus will have to sell almost twice the number of units to break even than originally projected.  I'm certain the A380 will fly and be seen all over the world.  But how it is viewed as a success is more a function of how much it has cost Airbus and how much it ultimately makes Airbus.  The delays are eating into those numbers wich quite a healthy appetite.

[quote]What if the 787 bombs!!!!!!! After all it IS still a "dream"!!!!!!!!!!!

[C]

In today's market with only two companies really producing effective long haul aircraft, it is unlikely any aircraft will "bomb" in the market. The highest profile failures in the last 35 years have been more down to external factors than the aircraft themselves (Concorde, L1011 etc...)

[NDSP]

The 787 is a faster and longer range version of the 757 or 767. Seeing how those two airplanes did, it leads me to believe that its less likely for the 787 to bomb then the A380. It is true that there arent a lot of planes the "bomb" but is it also true that not all airlines are looking for that big of a plane. Some airlines would just rather stick to the 747.

Once again (because I know someone will come in and say im camparing two totally different planes) I am comparing the planes by how well it will be able to do its job and whether its really better than what its replacing (saying that airbus looked like it was trying to dethrone the 747 and that the is 787 replacement for the 757).

Nick

[Jakemaster]

The 787 is a faster and longer range version of the 757 or 767. Seeing how those two airplanes did, it leads me to believe that its less likely for the 787 to bomb then the A380. It is true that there arent a lot of planes the "bomb" but is it also true that not all airlines are looking for that big of a plane. Some airlines would just rather stick to the 747.

Once again (because I know someone will come in and say im camparing two totally different planes) I am comparing the planes by how well it will be able to do its job and whether its really better than what its replacing (saying that airbus looked like it was trying to dethrone the 747 and that the is 787 replacement for the 757).

Nick

What a plane is replacing is no indication of its success.  Take my favorite for example.  There are a lot of planes designed to be better versions, and none were all that successful (C-123, Gulfstream 1, C-46...)

[vololiberista]

Some of the best a/c ever tp fly were not commercial successes due to politcs for example.
The VC10 and L1011 are 2 good examples
I think the Tristar is/was the best jet transport to come out of America
The VC10 was dogged with politics even whilst it was still on the drawing board. The head of BOAC was already in the pocket of Boeing with a secret deal of free start up a/c.

Although it was a noisy a/c and fuel hungry (a sign of the times i have to say!!) it outperformed everything and still does. Not many jet transports have or had the ability to both cruise at mach 0.94 at or above FL420 and land with room to spare at 120kts.
In this thread there has been an attempt to compare 2 a/c that are in fact completely different the only similarity being that they both have wings.
Every a/c has good and bad points.
The VC10 for example was a handfull to put it mildly when it came to a large crosswind component.
Requiring good skill to put it down in the vicinity of the airport!!!
Vololiberista

[dcunning30]

Some of the best a/c ever tp fly were not commercial successes due to politcs for example.

When a company has to answer to their creditors and shareholders, they can't use the excuse "politics caused us to make less money than projected, or worse, loose money".  That dog just won't hunt.

[vololiberista]

Some of the best a/c ever tp fly were not commercial successes due to politcs for example.

When a company has to answer to their creditors and shareholders, they can't use the excuse "politics caused us to make less money than projected, or worse, loose money".  That dog just won't hunt.

In the case of BOAC "British Overseas Airways Corporation" they were state owned and the government was the effective shereholder.  The government forced them to "Buy British" when they discovered BOAC had a secret arrangement to "acquire" 707's!
Because of this BOAC tried their best to sabotage the production of the VC10 by asking for changes and changes of changes etc. Then producing false figures (as they did to justify the end of Concorde) to pretend it was uneconomic when in fact it was the preferred a/c to cross the Atlantic.
Vololiberista

[C]

In the case of BOAC "British Overseas Airways Corporation" they were state owned and the government was the effective shereholder.  The government forced them to "Buy British" when they discovered BOAC had a secret arrangement to "acquire" 707's!
Because of this BOAC tried their best to sabotage the production of the VC10 by asking for changes and changes of changes etc. Then producing false figures (as they did to justify the end of Concorde) to pretend it was uneconomic when in fact it was the preferred a/c to cross the Atlantic.
Vololiberista

Good job it makes a good tanker then!

[dcunning30]

[quote]

State owned, interesting.  So they weren't subject to market forces and competition.  It's just tax payers money.  

[an-225]

Heatny it REALLY sounds like you are comparing the A380 to the 787. Look at the 747. It was a success. Look at the A380 which will be the future of travel. It is replacing the 747. That = success. As you stated, "the 787 is replacing the 757/767" That = success! "The 787 is fast" That also sounds like you are comparing with the A380. See there is a tradeoff here: 787=Less passengers/weight and faster. A380=More pax/weight=slower. Your signature is biased against Airbus and is wrong. The 787 or 747-8 part is possible. But you failed to mention the fact that, the Boeing Blended Wing Body is simply a design/experiment and will not enter actual service. You also failed to mention, that the Sonic Cruiser was cancelled, all in an attempt to make Boeing look good and to make Airbus look like the crappy unreliable company. Now, I'm not saying either company is better, I'm saying that each have their own qualities. Boeing has dominated air travel for 30 years now, its time for Airbus to combat it with the A380.  ;)

[Jakemaster]

A380 is not replacing the 747, its competing with it.

You cant predict a planes success on the success of what its replacing as I've said before.  All planes are different, a new design has its own set of qualities, some good, some bad, and we wont know how successful it is until it goes into service.

[C]

A380 is not replacing the 747, its competing with it.

Otherwise it would be made by Boeing, and not called the A380!