[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by ganeil

Don't get your panties in a wad there doc. I was making an observation. I live in Atlanta metro and Delta is the home team.

It is sad to see your worthless posts are not confined to the political realm. Don't worry though, we are used to you being wrong.

At least i admit I was wrong...
As for you and your idol (W) -- never will admit dragging the country into hell...

BTW -- 15 years ago when I went to Hong Kong, it was nice but way behind us.
Yesterday (being in HKG) ...I realized that HKG, Japan, even some cities in China are decades ahead of us (infrastructure, buildings, Communications, transportation, cleaniness...even polution)

Just think about that...and your 12-year-old's future.

Maybe you should teach him Chinese instead military crap?

[wuufer001]

my dad like a 20 something inch long model of the A380 in his office. looks pretty tight

[RIP-A4]

Originally Posted by 325 Baller

The BA 747 is the plane i took to england 3 weeks ago. there getting dated, once the 787 comes out it will put Boeing back at the top

I don't think Boeing will be back on top with the 787, it might be fuel efficient but 380 will carry a massive load of passengers and cargo, cargo is another factor airlines consider when contracting a manufactor. Watch 3 years after the A380 comes out and updated version of the 747 will be announced.

[bartman32]

Updated 747 has already been announced. They said they were going to make the second level the full size of the plane. That being said with all the retrofitting of airports and push toward more convienience ala more smaller flights my guess is that both won't do that well. 787 will be more economical and quieter which passengers and companies will like more.

[E90SLAM]

I went to see the A380 in Hong Kong during the Asian Aerospace Expo. Went on board and its HUGE!!!

But when you sit in economy seats, you don't feel much different than any other jetliners. well...it all depends on individual airlines...

[RIP-A4]

Originally Posted by bartman32

Updated 747 has already been announced. They said they were going to make the second level the full size of the plane. That being said with all the retrofitting of airports and push toward more convienience ala more smaller flights my guess is that both won't do that well. 787 will be more economical and quieter which passengers and companies will like more.

787 is a mid range aircraft isn't it? and even if they do make an ER (extended range) configuration it might even get an extended fuselage which will make more sense if it's going to be doing long hual trips more passengers. Which in turn will be more wieght/ materials to build/ fuel to burn. cost go up...i was working at Boeing when the whole A380 and at that time Boeings answer was a subsonic jetliner. But no one jumped on Boeings concept being after concord crashed and would soon be set to retire. Plus the design was not cost effective for mass production and service use. A380 is a more real world approach.

[RIP-A4]

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

I went to see the A380 in Hong Kong during the Asian Aerospace Expo. Went on board and its HUGE!!!

But when you sit in economy seats, you don't feel much different than any other jetliners. well...it all depends on individual airlines...

yes it does more bang for the buck

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by RIP-A4

yes it does more bang for the buck

Yea...If the airline like Ryanair or Corsair get the A380 for high density seating (all econ with small seat pitch)...it can cramp like 800+ passengers!!!

[bartman32]

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

Yea...If the airline like Ryanair or Corsair get the A380 for high density seating (all econ with small seat pitch)...it can cramp like 800+ passengers!!!

move'em in partner.... mmoooo mmmmooooo....

Hearded like catle!

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

Yea...If the airline like Ryanair or Corsair get the A380 for high density seating (all econ with small seat pitch)...it can cramp like 800+ passengers!!!

Ryanair is not a long haul airline.
It would be not a wise decision for them to have 380 no matter how many pax they pack in it...
Same thing is putting the winglets on 757 for shor haul flights -- does not make sense...

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by RIP-A4

787 is a mid range aircraft isn't it? and even if they do make an ER (extended range) configuration it might even get an extended fuselage which will make more sense if it's going to be doing long hual trips more passengers. Which in turn will be more wieght/ materials to build/ fuel to burn. cost go up...i was working at Boeing when the whole A380 and at that time Boeings answer was a subsonic jetliner. But no one jumped on Boeings concept being after concord crashed and would soon be set to retire. Plus the design was not cost effective for mass production and service use. A380 is a more real world approach.

I have seen some very empty long haul planes, but I have seen very packed ones in Asia. I am not sure how many airliners would benefit from 400+ pax aircraft.
On the other hand, 787 was not supposed to compete with the 380 at all.
For example, the US to Seoul route would not be a good example for the 380, but the ER or LR 787 (or A350...or currently 777) is a perfect airplane for it.
A380 would be perfect for London-NYC or LAX, SIN-SYD, HKG, NRT and so on...

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by dr325i

Ryanair is not a long haul airline.
It would be not a wise decision for them to have 380 no matter how many pax they pack in it...
Same thing is putting the winglets on 757 for shor haul flights -- does not make sense...

Ryanair focus on more frequency and fast turnaround....so they pick 737s....
A380 will just takes too long for them fpr turn-around....

However, other example is Tokyo Haneda to Osaka Itami (I think they banned 4 engine aircrafts). They focus on high density routes, given both ANA and JAL config high density 747-SR (retired) and 747-400D (replacing by B777-300).....which is approx one hour flight between tokyo and osaka....
And because this is a short route, the additional weight on the winglet doesn't justify the fuel saving....so 747-400D does not have winglets.

Also airline like Corsair, they usually fly high density low cost carriben destinations....which they might pick up used A380 15-20 years later....
Same for Air Asia X, Oasis....etc....

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by dr325i

I have seen some very empty long haul planes, but I have seen very packed ones in Asia. I am not sure how many airliners would benefit from 400+ pax aircraft.
On the other hand, 787 was not supposed to compete with the 380 at all.
For example, the US to Seoul route would not be a good example for the 380, but the ER or LR 787 (or A350...or currently 777) is a perfect airplane for it.
A380 would be perfect for London-NYC or LAX, SIN-SYD, HKG, NRT and so on...

787 can be long haul also....focus on point to point destinations....such as MAN-HKG, NRT-ATL.....
Which this type will be compete with A350-XWB if Airbus ever finish the design....

A380 will be hub to hub, JFK-LHR, JFK-FRA....etc....replacing B747-400....but Boeing will be launch the B747-8 intercontinental to compete...

[E90SLAM]

Both Airbus and Boeing don't want to lose any ground on "point to point" or "hub to hub" airliners to each other!

[RIP-A4]

Originally Posted by dr325i

Same thing is putting the winglets on 757 for shor haul flights -- does not make sense...

To what I remember winglets were for better fuel economy and stabibility for flight. I don't think they have anything to do with short or long haul flights.

[TurboFan]

worst plane ever - 767ER, Delta seating package.

The A340 w/ South African Air isn't a bad way to spend 18 hours. I've done it a dozen times or so!

[TurboFan]

Originally Posted by RIP-A4

To what I remember winglets were for better fuel economy and stabibility for flight. I don't think they have anything to do with short or long haul flights.

Winglets help the aerodynamics of the wing. It's smooths the airflow around the wingtip, reducing drag-inducing vorticies. It helps over any distance, as it noticalbly reduces drag, and therefor fuel consumption.

[TurboFan]

Originally Posted by RIP-A4

I don't think Boeing will be back on top with the 787, it might be fuel efficient but 380 will carry a massive load of passengers and cargo, cargo is another factor airlines consider when contracting a manufactor. Watch 3 years after the A380 comes out and updated version of the 747 will be announced.

The economics of the industry are changing. While there is a great demand for cargo, relatively few planes are needed to meet the demand. Think how much air cargo it takes to fill an A380. There will probably be a few dozen tasked to the Pan-American routes, but that's not taking over the industry.

The 78 will replace a number of aging jets - the 72, 73, 75 and even the 76. The lower cost per mile will be a huge savings to the airline industry. As we improve the technology in the sky, and get away from hub and spoke systems, which are a throw-back to the 1920's and 1930's, the need for massive transports and small RJ's will be reduced for domestic use, and more midsize planes will fly point to point.

The hub and spoke goes back to the dawn of aviation, when airports were small and few, and navigation was visual, from bonfire to bonfire. People would fly from an airfield to an airport, then to an airport, then to the airfield where the needed to be. There is no justification for the system to still be in use, other than cost of replacement.

[335i4u2nv]

wow u people sure know alot of knowledge... i wish i was as smrt!

[TurboFan]

Originally Posted by 335i4u2nv

wow u people sure know alot of knowledge... i wish i was as smrt!

Study hard, stay in school, and don't do drugs.

[RIP-A4]

Originally Posted by TurboFan

Winglets help the aerodynamics of the wing. It's smooths the airflow around the wingtip, reducing drag-inducing vorticies. It helps over any distance, as it noticalbly reduces drag, and therefor fuel consumption.

So bascilly what I said

[TurboFan]

Originally Posted by RIP-A4

So bascilly what I said

yep. Just adding some detail to your post for the good doctor.