Future not good for super sized passenger jets

After Boeing and Airbus have invested millions in designing and building a new generation of super-sized planes, they may not see their money back according to this article

A video I shot the other day of the two in question.

Two big birds.

It never ceases to amaze me how something that large can fly.....nice video Mark.

Cheers Phil...the A308 only just gets over the lamp post LOL.

Edited By Mark Kettle 1 on 24/04/2015 07:08:17

Is that a 747-800? BA's website does not list that model in fleet.

I'm not really into the old meat-haulers, but that last aircraft (Singapore Airlines) looked like it was struggling badly - is that normal?

Andy

I see regularly see the A380 climbing out of Manchester.

It does look like it must be at the point of stalling but it is an optical illusion. We tend to judge speed as the time it takes to travel it own length. For something so big (and with its huge area wings) it seems to be travelling much too slowly.

Probably right there Si. If that was a model, I'd be chopping the throttle and bringing her back in!

@Hi Peter , the upper limit of the size of an commercial airplanes today has achieved the intended desired earnings in service.....the balance of ''the law of investment and gain''.
Any increase, in the dimensions of an aircrafts after that, will produce losses (financial and other)...it is my humble opinion...

Cheers and ,Let live the Cornwall.

Jo

Edited By Josip Vrandecic -Mes on 24/04/2015 11:38:58

Edited By Josip Vrandecic -Mes on 24/04/2015 11:59:09

Nothing suggest any issue at all, Pilot is complying with noise abatement protocols, etc. LOADS in reserve!

Re: "Meat Haulers", I used to like one website I frequented, they listed plane sections as, Vintage/WW1, WW2, Light Civils, Jets and "Air Pollution"...............

Absolutely. I couldn't believe the performance when I saw a A380 at Farnborough Air Show. Fair enough, at the show it is devoid of weight (of fuel, passengers, luggage), but still gives a glimpse of how much is in reserve.

Super shot of the wing profile from the rear....that is a very deep sweep on the inboard edges.

I'm convinced the predicted global increase in air travel combined with the lack of viable new airport developments will only see more large widebody aircraft being required by the major airlines. Whether they will be 4 engined machines like the 747 or A380 is another question, as the power generated by large diameter engines combined with their reliability means twins are more attractive to the operator (from a fuel burn perspective) on the vast majority of routes.

Having said that, just this month Emirates have placed an order for 50 new Airbus A380s, and they are building a 6 (yes SIX!) runway super airport to be kitted out with 100+ double decker terminal gates in Dubai... they clearly see the requirement for large scale aircraft and have placed their confidence in the A380 as the vehicle with which to meet the passenger demand. It's very likely other airlines will watch on and follow suite to stay competitive.

I think economics will dictate we'll be seeing superjumbos for a long time to come.

I was at that show too. The flight was unbelievable.

Even better, looking forward to the tour of the Boeing factory in Seattle next month, if they haven't gone bust in the meantine.

Edited By Andy48 on 24/04/2015 19:54:24

........And 200 engines, plus spares for the lucky supplier(s). Also, I believe that they're not all firm orders, if the press are to be believed.

QUOTE:

Hopefully, but if there's a global impact, for instance another 9-11 or war, it will unfortunately upset the economics somewhat.

I'm at Heathrow about 4 times a week, and the other day on the M25 I could see the activities of the airport from about 8 miles out and noticed landing flat approach and take off the usual steep angle.

What I was thinking was, how much fuel would be saved if the angle of flight for take off was done at the same angle as on approach for landing. Even considering the weight at take off why be so 'lairy' with the power.

Video fuel saving paint finish / coating, and weight saving manuals saves millions of dollars in fuel.

Edited By Mark Kettle 1 on 24/04/2015 20:42:49

Across all operations for Delta Airlines and multi million pound saving via a laptop / tablet.

Edited By Mark Kettle 1 on 24/04/2015 20:50:50

Edited By Mark Kettle 1 on 24/04/2015 20:51:52

Edited By Mark Kettle 1 on 24/04/2015 20:53:00

A380 is fantastic to fly on when you can afford business class (or your company does), in January I flew from Dallas to Sydney as one leg of a round the world trip with Quantas. Over 17 hours flight time, not sure you could manage that in a twin engined plane, although you need plenty to keep you occupied. When you are on the upper deck at take off it is quite odd, you are out of the engine noise and the tyre noise and you do not seem to be fast enough to rotate, yet up it goes. I have had a shower in an A380 at 40,000ft over the Indian Ocean once, just had to do it for the novelty value.

Bill_B - yes a fantastic win for Rolls and all linked via their supply chain - 220 engines will really do the Trent 900 programme a lot of good!

As I understand it the Emirates order is for 50 A380 CEO with the option to convert the second half of the order to NEO should Airbus launch the improved, more efficient, weight reduced airframe. But it is all solid business for RR one way or the other.

Ah well.. I've flown an A380 : on a cockpit simulator. My son lives in Abu Dhabi and there's an A380 SIM in the Y as island shopping mall. I had a fly on it and landed at Heathrow! There is no control column just a side stick on the left of the pilot's seat. I had to resist the temptation to pull back in turns to keep the nose up, it's all automatic on the 380 as is rudder. No need for coordinated turns, the rudder bar is mainly for ground steering. I have flown on a 380 as a passenger from Abu Dhabi to Melbourne, about 14 hours.

PeterF here's a video about extended ETOPS....for long flights on two engines.