davemania Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 OULOUSE, France (CNN) -- The world's largest passenger plane, the A380, is scheduled to make its maiden flight from Toulouse, France.Weather permitting, the "superjumbo" will take off at approximately 10 a.m. local time (0800 GMT), and could be airborne from anywhere between one and five hours -- possibly longer. Made by European company Airbus, the A380 will challenge the Boeing 747's long dominance of the jumbo jet market. France, Britain, Germany and Spain all invested heavily in the 10-year, ?10-billion-plus (U.S. $13-billion-plus) program to make the plane. The 555-seat aircraft is massive, consisting of four aisles in its passenger build, and has a range of up to 15,000 kilometers (8,000 nautical miles). A freight version, which has been ordered by UPS and FedEx, is to be unveiled at a later date, and will be able to carry cargoes of 150 tons over 10,400 kilometers. Some passenger planes will have cocktail bars, double beds and massage parlors, while the company has hinted that selected jets may even have jacuzzis and mini-casinos. According to Airbus, the A380 has been designed with the environment in mind; it has about a 13 percent lower fuel burn than the 747; and is the first long-haul aircraft to consume less than three liters of fuel per passenger over 100 kilometers -- said to be as efficient as your average family car. Carbon fibre components and fuel-efficient technology also mean the cost per passenger should be up to 20 percent less than on a 747, raising the possibility of cheaper tickets. But Boeing has talked down the threat posed by the A380, notably by saying that few airports in the world were modified to take the bulk of the new superjumbo, despite Airbus's claims that 50 were ready. The U.S. company has also embarked on a midsize long-range aircraft it is calling the 7E7 Dreamliner. Boeing is also looking at further modifying its ageing 747 to take 450 passengers. Although the A380 project has run some $1.4 billion over budget, Airbus believes it will recoup its costs in 2008 and be an extremely profitable flagship product for decades to come. Airbus chief Noel Forgeard told CNN in January the aircraft had already nearly covered its costs. Thirteen companies have already placed firm orders for 149 of the aircraft, which comes with a catalogue price of between U.S. $263 and $286 million (?200 and ?218 million.) China signed contracts on April 21 to buy five Airbus A380 super-jumbo jets and 25 other Airbus jetliners in a series of deals totaling more than $3.2 billion. (Full story) The A380 was originally unveiled at a star-studded event on January 18 in France. (Full story) http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/26...unch/index.html The test flight will take place in about an hour, it should be interesting to watch that thing fly for the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altezza Veteran Posted April 27, 2005 Veteran Share Posted April 27, 2005 Airbus 380 finally fly! :woot: :cool: The picture was taken from Airliners.net website. http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.sear...s&keywords=a380 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundayx Veteran Posted April 27, 2005 Veteran Share Posted April 27, 2005 tho its been a good long wait, this huge muhfuhing thing finally soars. cant wait till delivery but im still eager for boeings dreamliner, or now called 7E7/787. much better deisgn and architecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSoul Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 tho its been a good long wait, this huge muhfuhing thing finally soars. cant wait till deliverybut im still eager for boeings dreamliner, or now called 7E7/787. much better deisgn and architecture. 585836558[/snapback] the most amazing thing is that the dreamliner flies the same length as this mega jumbo which is 3 times bigger, the so called fuel efficient plane is less fuel efficient than megajumbo itself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferret Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 Now that is some plane... Would love to have been the pilots in that thing today :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fr0stbite1 Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 great plane yes, but its a stupid idea it can only land at the 5 or so big hubs, boeing have got it right, we need planes no bigger than the current 747's, which can fly far, and fast and also fuel efficient this thing will be so heavy with passengers it wont be able to fly very far at all, plus with all the people in it, it will be like a cattle truck, forget the claims of a bar, a spa, music room etc, thats all bull they will cram people into it nice plane, but not the future, will fail like the concord Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemania Posted April 27, 2005 Author Share Posted April 27, 2005 great plane yes, but its a stupid ideait can only land at the 5 or so big hubs, boeing have got it right, we need planes no bigger than the current 747's, which can fly far, and fast and also fuel efficient this thing will be so heavy with passengers it wont be able to fly very far at all, plus with all the people in it, it will be like a cattle truck, forget the claims of a bar, a spa, music room etc, thats all bull they will cram people into it nice plane, but not the future, will fail like the concord 585837497[/snapback] A380 is aimed at heavy density routes. Those airports are nearits maximum capacity. The point is to increase the passenger per plane and relieve the plane congestions at those airports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fr0stbite1 Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 you increase congestion inside airports though with 600 people at one gate, runways need to be renforced, theres probably only about 10 airports max able to do it, theres not alot of routes for it at all, and its not really increasing passenger per plane, due to the space the thing will take up, 2 747's hold more, and probably are easier to find space for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasondefaoite Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 I disagree Frostbite. The main problem now with the major global airports is lack of availability of landing/takeoff slots. The major routes are just too busy. It's either you make the airports bigger, or increase the number of passengers per flight. Heathrow suffers from a severe lack of additional slots, and this is exactly what an airport like that needs, which is why the Singapore / London route will be the first to get it. we need planes no bigger than the current 747's, which can fly far, and fast and also fuel efficientthis thing will be so heavy with passengers it wont be able to fly very far at all Er this has a longer range than the 747, and is more fuel efficient too. With regard to stuffing people in like cattle, only the airlines can make that decision, not airbus. However from what I have read on this, it does seem economy will be nothing majorly different vs the 747, but you will have slightly bigger seats/more leg room. The major changes will be in business/first class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasondefaoite Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 its not really increasing passenger per plane, due to the space the thing will take up, 2 747's hold more, and probably are easier to find space for 585837532[/snapback] Wrong. Thats exactly what it is doing. The problem isn't so much space on the ground, its the landing/take off slots at those major hubs. Those are primarily the limiting factor here, and this guy is a solution. I do agree however that its market will only be on those major routes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoNuTs Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 Saw it on CNN ... Exciting stuff :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SapUMBC Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 great plane yes, but its a stupid ideait can only land at the 5 or so big hubs, boeing have got it right, we need planes no bigger than the current 747's, which can fly far, and fast and also fuel efficient this thing will be so heavy with passengers it wont be able to fly very far at all, plus with all the people in it, it will be like a cattle truck, forget the claims of a bar, a spa, music room etc, thats all bull they will cram people into it nice plane, but not the future, will fail like the concord 585837497[/snapback] You must be an expert! Or a complete idiot who has no idea what he's talking about. I'll take the latter. Please stop rambling now :sleep: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
at0mican Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 OMG!!! This is t3h l33t!! I want to book a flight on this plane to anywhere, as long as I can go onboard. So impressive, wow. /changes underwear. :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Ride Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 I guess all of you "anti-airbus" people are just jealous that Airbus (Europeans) build a revolutionary plane and not Boeing (Americans) ? Isn't it ? Stupid Beoing fanboys ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 I guess all of you "anti-airbus" people are just jealous that Airbus (Europeans) build a revolutionary plane and not Boeing (Americans) ? Isn't it ?Stupid Beoing fanboys ... 585839769[/snapback] I agree. But then again, I am biased given that .... 1.) My house is a few miles from where the wings are made.. 2.) Its the place where I did my work experience (7 years ago), 3.) Its the site where my Dad is a team leader on the A380 wing production line :laugh: So you could say I'm slightly biased. My opinion about Airbus/Boeing?? Simply put, Boeing got far too cocky about being bigger than everyone else, being the biggest and not really taking the competition seriously. They complain about Airbus getting government assistance, but I'm sure I read somewhere that the US government assist Boeing quite well. I still prefer Airbus aircraft, and if i had the choice of being given a Boeing 737 or an Airbus A319 as a gift (I can dream!) I'd choose the A319 like a flash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ember Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 its really a nice plane, saw the event live from CNN and airbus' live stream :D fkin awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Zeino Posted April 29, 2005 Share Posted April 29, 2005 The Boeing v Airbus debate is very widespread, as many pilots simply refuse to fly airbuses planes as they have a very hardline computer navigation system on board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drshdw Posted May 1, 2005 Share Posted May 1, 2005 you increase congestion inside airports though with 600 people at one gate, runways need to be renforced, theres probably only about 10 airports max able to do it, theres not alot of routes for it at all, and its not really increasing passenger per plane, due to the space the thing will take up, 2 747's hold more, and probably are easier to find space for 585837532[/snapback] Just like the Concorde landed only at New York, London, and Paris.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drshdw Posted May 1, 2005 Share Posted May 1, 2005 I disagree Frostbite. The main problem now with the major global airports is lack of availability of landing/takeoff slots. The major routes are just too busy. It's either you make the airports bigger, or increase the number of passengers per flight. Heathrow suffers from a severe lack of additional slots, and this is exactly what an airport like that needs, which is why the Singapore / London route will be the first to get it.Er this has a longer range than the 747, and is more fuel efficient too. With regard to stuffing people in like cattle, only the airlines can make that decision, not airbus. However from what I have read on this, it does seem economy will be nothing majorly different vs the 747, but you will have slightly bigger seats/more leg room. The major changes will be in business/first class. 585837548[/snapback] It should have a longer range than the 747 and more fuel efficient too. The 747 is OLD! The first 747-100 came out in 1968...thats over 35 years ago. The 747-400/ER can travel pretty far too, 13.5k/14k km vs A380's 15k. That's not that bad considering the A380's size. Of the either two, I'd rather fly a 777. :whistle: The 777-300's engines are slick, 98,000lbs of thrust compared to the A380's 70,000 and the 747's 68,000. Plus who would want to fly with 4 engines when you can fly with just 2. Less noise, more comfort. No need for an A380, the 7E7/787 is awesome. Airbus should of stuck to more streamlined planes rather than another jumbojet. And the 787's wings are CURVED!!!!!!!!!!! Looks like a bird :happy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altezza Veteran Posted May 4, 2005 Veteran Share Posted May 4, 2005 It should have a longer range than the 747 and more fuel efficient too. The 747 is OLD! The first 747-100 came out in 1968...thats over 35 years ago. The 747-400/ER can travel pretty far too, 13.5k/14k km vs A380's 15k. That's not that bad considering the A380's size. Of the either two, I'd rather fly a 777. :whistle: The 777-300's engines are slick, 98,000lbs of thrust compared to the A380's 70,000 and the 747's 68,000. Plus who would want to fly with 4 engines when you can fly with just 2. Less noise, more comfort. No need for an A380, the 7E7/787 is awesome. Airbus should of stuck to more streamlined planes rather than another jumbojet. And the 787's wings are CURVED!!!!!!!!!!! Looks like a bird :happy: 585855146[/snapback] Like this? ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idoia Posted May 4, 2005 Share Posted May 4, 2005 fail like the concorde? Boeing thought it would fail... Mmm there are more than 250 orders for the A380 . And why do you think is Boeing thinking about a new b747 xtralarge ? Plus I think comparing the A380 vs the B787 is like comparing apples and oranges. Between the B747 (max480pax) vs. the A380 (max800pax) = the A380 all the way now the B787 vs. A350 = B787 would be my choice since the the A350 is just a remodeled A340 . The B787 is whole set of new technologies and components. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drshdw Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 fail like the concorde? Boeing thought it would fail...Mmm there are more than 250 orders for the A380 . And why do you think is Boeing thinking about a new b747 xtralarge ? Plus I think comparing the A380 vs the B787 is like comparing apples and oranges. Between the B747 (max480pax) vs. the A380 (max800pax) = the A380 all the way now the B787 vs. A350 = B787 would be my choice since the the A350 is just a remodeled A340 . The B787 is whole set of new technologies and components. 585871206[/snapback] Yes, the Concorde failed in the end to keep up.. so yes, it "failed", it was retired, due to money problems. 250 orders is...well, nothing. A 747 extralarge? Oh god...*runs* I want to know what companies would want to have economy class throughout their entire airplane,..why would they do such a thing? O.o 787s look sexy! :shifty: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts