Airbus A380 to take flight for the very first time

[HeilSvenska]

The graceful giantess of the sky, the newly launched Airbus A380 will make its maiden voyage on April 27th, 2005, if the weather and technicalities allow. On the flight will be the Vice President of Airbus’ Flight Test Division, Fernando Alonso (not the Spanish F1 star).

The Airbus A380 was launched January this year as the European rival, if not replacement for the aging Boeing 747. It is said to be the most advanced passenger jet and one of the most efficient. It is definitely the largest. It's one of the most expensive as well, as the A3XX-A380 project is rumoured to cost 12billion+euros. Thanks to its large size, the A380 can have many facilities that are not available in existing commercial jets such as a duty-free shops, bars, parlors, plus casinos and beds, in which one has at least two ways to get lucky according to Sir Richard Branson. The coolest thing for me about the A380 is that you can have one with Rolls-Royce engines.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4481733.stm
http://www.airbus.com/airbus4u/artic...asp?ae_id=1686

[RC45]

Without airports upgraded to handle the influx of pax when a couple arrive it's a rather pointless upgrade.

Could you imagine a Heathrow or Schipol or O'Hare that had regular 747 traffic replaced with a fleet of these.

I can think of 2 scenarios - the first is that without jetway upgrades embarking and disembarking will take 3 times as long...

and the second is after jetways are upgraded the fact that twice as many pax will be arriving and departing for the same number of flights.

:roll:

[GT-R_R34]

just think of ticket lines.
i don't think that LAX is going to be ready. i think most of the 380 are going to be at the remote gates.
the plane is great if they are going to use 1 plane instead of 2 747's.

[T-Bird]

It will be one hell of a sight seeing these things flying around here (not too far from O'hare flight circle traffic) It's very easy to identify the planes overhead Maybe I can get on one when I go overseas next year.

[gobs3z]

I think it's a great looking plane, but the concept they're going after with more people per flight is going to flop imo. Boeing's 7E7 seems to me to be a better way for air travel by having a more luxurious cabin for the common person which will make air travel a lot more comfortable than it is today and will also get people back to wanting to fly since it won't be a hassle/uncomfortable on the plane. This is still trying to get the most people possible on an aircraft to save money for airlines. Looks awesome, but not the best idea for this time period of air travel.

[HeilSvenska]

It's no longer called the 7E7 (E probably being Experimental), it's now more ubiquitous sounding 787.

The 787 does sound great, but it's still years away, unfortunately.

What i want to know is what's going on with the Sonic Cruiser concept. Boeing's been quiet about it since 2002. It's supposed to be the fastest commercial plane since the Concorde.

[gobs3z]

The "E" in 7E7 stands for efficiency. And the last update was in 2002 for the Sonic Cruiser from Boeing. I think it's in the works but they just need to get past the issues of cost vs. speed. Thats where the Concorde lost out and was a business catastrophe. They're using a "cranked arrow" which has so little drag that plane can fly sub-sonic ( Mach .95-.98 ) and not waist fuel that the delta wing on the Concorde has which wastes a lot more fuel than this Sonic Cruiser concept. They might use the 777's engines if it's ever built. Here's a neat rendering

[blah]

The baggage people are screwed. Think about how much baggage will come form one of these. Now think of 2 or 3 at once.

[vexor]

^^^ That's a lot of baggage....

But I heard that Vancouver International Airport is all ready to take these new A380 planes, hopefully if i see one in the skies i'll have my camera with me and grab a few pics of it.

[zondaland]

The interesting thing for me is that airbus tend to manufacture their planes from composite materials, while boeing tend to manufacture theirs from aluminium. This means that the A380 (and other airbus planes) are relatively light compared to their size. Also with the A380 being so much newer than the 747 I understand that it is significantly better aerodynamically. Overall I understand that the actual costs per passenger for the A380 will be less than those for the 747.

Living in Sydney I can also assure you that the A380 will be used where airlines have strict quotas on flights into airports (the Sydney airport is pathetically tiny). For example Singapore Airlines is one of the major buyers for the A380 and plan to try to crack the Australian market more with the A380.

[gobs3z]

Originally Posted by zondaland The interesting thing for me is that airbus tend to manufacture their planes from composite materials, while boeing tend to manufacture theirs from aluminium. This means that the A380 (and other airbus planes) are relatively light compared to their size.

This is where the 787 comes in. Boeing is using composite materials, very light weight, and airbus is bashing boeing saying that they're composites are not advanced enough to be put into service and they're rushing it which is at all not true, but thats competition for ya. The 787 is supposed to make air travle A LOT cheaper than it is now. Boeing is thinking of created an all new Boeing 747 called the 747 Advanced to compete with the A380. Boeing is still selling 747 cargo planes but next year they'll be finished with the 400 model and maybe we'll see an even larger jet from Boeing if the A380 has a market.

[gigdy]

Originally Posted by gobs3z The "E" in 7E7 stands for efficiency. And the last update was in 2002 for the Sonic Cruiser from Boeing. I think it's in the works but they just need to get past the issues of cost vs. speed. Thats where the Concorde lost out and was a business catastrophe. They're using a "cranked arrow" which has so little drag that plane can fly sub-sonic ( Mach .95-.98 ) and not waist fuel that the delta wing on the Concorde has which wastes a lot more fuel than this Sonic Cruiser concept. They might use the 777's engines if it's ever built. Here's a neat rendering

The sonic cruiser is very dead. and should and will probably never be revived.

[GT-R_R34]

to let everyone know the 787 is going to replace the 767 not the 747. saw it on the latest aviationweek. don't know if they just came out with the 767-600. now they are going to use the 777-200LR (LongRange). i think Boing is going after the long range and fuel economy. rather than how many people can it load into it.

[zondaland]

I did read that Boeing are of the belief that the airline routes will suffer a major fragmentation. They feel that traditional high volume routes will diminish, with people going to more destinations, they are also apparently of the opinion that in the future there will be many more direct routes, rather than the current system of essentially major hubs with smaller routes from there. Because of this they were saying that they felt large planes (747, A380) would not be in high demand over the longer term. But as with all things, logic and modelling could very easily be shown to be a complete moron. If the A380 is immensely popular then no doubt Boeing will launch a competitor.

[jakaracman]

140 orders (and new ones keep comming) shows that it'll at least be financial success for Airbus, if not (if Boeing is correct) for alirlines.
And it's supposed to be more comfortable for economy passengers than current planes, because it's a double-decker and could pack 600+ pax if otfitted the same as 340 or 747, but will "only" pack 500-550 ...