A380 Production Sadness

[RooFlyer]

Antonov An-225 Mriya -- the largest aircraft by weight, length and wingspan

The 'spruce goose' might trump your Antinov on wingspan, straitman?

Edit: Yes; Sprucegoose (Hughes A4 Hercules) wingspan = 98m; Antonov An-225 Mriya = 88m

Boeing 747-8 = 68m; A380 = 80m (all according to Google )

 

[Jacques Vert]

Are any of them capable of enticing @jb747 to get back in the saddle?

 

[jase05]

While many people would love to experience a jumbo sized plane, I agree the majority of travellers will in the end go for the deal whatever planes that involves. Our next overseas jaunt has a mix of A330/A350 with the odd A319 because the deal makes sense. It is now some 5 years since I last flew in the A380, as much as I personally enjoy them, because I go with the best deal from an airline on our fly list, and just accept the aircraft provided (including the droop-bed on the QF 747 last month).

I’m probably a bit the other way and will actively avoid some aircraft even if it includes paying significantly more or taking a different route.

 

[Berlin]

You choose to drink Coke over Pepsi. Do you choose to fly Boeing over Airbus?

Of course I do, though the other way round, for both Pepsi and Airbus funnily: I can't even count all the times the I've chosen a flight (or even airline) over another because of the aircraft type. That's the main reason, to name an example, that I avoid Cathay like the plague, great service and good connections notwithstanding.

As my better half, who is totally not an airline nerd as me, says these days: Nothing matters more than the aircraft type. I couldn't agree more. The Jetstar crowd might not give a damn but especially amongst regular business traveller, this is actually very common: had lots of work colleagues over the years- always flying Business, no less- who have also discovered the importance of that little aircraft identifier when booking flights.

 

[cambriamarsh]

I’m probably a bit the other way and will actively avoid some aircraft even if it includes paying significantly more or taking a different route.

For example?

 

[serfty]

I think the biggest challenge is the engine - the RR Trent 900 and EA GP7000 are dated and while they have received some updates developed for later engines (eg the 777/350 Trent 1000 and XWB) they remain way behind in performance, and I can't see a future A380 selling substantial numbers.

Ideal solution imho would be to design an A380neo to operate on the next gen A350 engines without substantial alterations - thus avoiding the big engine development cost.

Then Airbus could do the stretch that the wings were originally designed for, the improved sidewalls allowing 11 across (unfortunately) and new age materials, and you probably have an aircraft that continues to be cost competitive (when full) against the big twins.

Somewhat prescient ...

I have read that Emirates had been having a stand off with Airbus over the order book, but eventually came back to the table since they were beginning to have trouble getting engines for their new aircraft.

Airlines weren't the only companies looking at dumping the A380. GE doesn't want to make engines for thr aircraft any more and RR don't want to spend $$$ to fix their under-performing Trents.

It's a magnificent piece of machinery but ....

 

[jase05]

For example?

Not withstanding the poor lounge setup at ADL the main reason we fly to MEL or SYD when flying with EK is to avoid the 777 and to get the A380. This goes for connections at DXB aswell as we will choose a longer transit time or route to ensure we get the A380. CX is the same, we prefer the A350 over the A330 and will actively seek them out when choosing to fly with them. Crossing the ditch we will always try to avoid the 737 if possible, same goes for transcontinental aswell

 

[OATEK]

Not withstanding the poor lounge setup at ADL the main reason we fly to MEL or SYD when flying with EK is to avoid the 777 and to get the A380. This goes for connections at DXB aswell as we will choose a longer transit time or route to ensure we get the A380. CX is the same, we prefer the A350 over the A330 and will actively seek them out when choosing to fly with them. Crossing the ditch we will always try to avoid the 737 if possible, same goes for transcontinental aswell

Fair enough too. I try to select the A330 SYD-MEL and upgrade to J on points - the best way to fly this route IMHO. But for overseas trips in the last 5 years I have spread the spend about 50/50 between CX and AY who do not have A380s. I prefer a CX B777, but will go with an A330 if the deal is right. Similarly with AY I love the A350s, but have coped happily with the A330 if the deal is right. In my case it is more that I find the best deals (for me) on non-A380 carriers than those that have the double decker. A heavy influence is that we fly J on the long routes to Europe, and AY in particular are usually around $2-$2.5k cheaper per head than QF, Qatar or EK at the times we have flown.

 

[JohnK]

You choose to drink Coke over Pepsi. Do you choose to fly Boeing over Airbus?

I prefer Boeing which is why someone such as SQ doesn't get much of my business.

And within the same airline I have the preference of 747->A380-777-A350-A330-787.

With the 787 it's more the configuration the airlines chose.

 

[oz_mark]

I prefer Boeing which is why someone such as SQ doesn't get much of my business.

And within the same airline I have the preference of 747->A380-777-A350-A330-787.

With the 787 it's more the configuration the airlines chose.

My suspicion is that people favour configuration over the manufacturer.

 

[odysseus]

My suspicion is that people favour configuration over the manufacturer.

There's a correlation between comfortable configurations and manufacturer.

 

[jase05]

My suspicion is that people favour configuration over the manufacturer.

Yes, the configuration definitely plays a big part in selecting an airline

 

[RooFlyer]

I prefer Boeing which is why someone such as SQ doesn't get much of my business.

And within the same airline I have the preference of 747->A380-777-A350-A330-787.

With the 787 it's more the configuration the airlines chose.

Sounds like Holden Vs Ford, doesn't it?

 

[JohnK]

My suspicion is that people favour configuration over the manufacturer.

Does that explain the 9 across 787 and 10 across 777?

I don't rate the 777 that highly but EK out of/into BNE suits. I'm not keen on the 9 across 787 at all and is one to avoid regardless of route.

 

[suze2000]

I’m probably a bit the other way and will actively avoid some aircraft even if it includes paying significantly more or taking a different route.

Absolutely. Aircraft type is the main determinant for me when choosing flights.

Does that explain the 9 across 787 and 10 across 777?

I don't rate the 777 that highly but EK out of/into BNE suits. I'm not keen on the 9 across 787 at all and is one to avoid regardless of route.

Don't forget that JAL has 8-across on the 787.

 

[JohnK]

Don't forget that JAL has 8-across on the 787.

And from memory we thought most airlines would follow.

 

[jase05]

And from memory we thought most airlines would follow.

My memory is that the 787 was designed to be 2-4-2 in Y but airlines figured out they could squeeze another seat in.
JL should absolutely be commended for going down the 8 across route

 

[MathNerd]

Very sad news indeed.

I have fond memories of booking tickets (cash tickets in whY nonetheless!) and actively scouting for the A380 or A388 expression in the flight lists that appear. Given that the vast majority of my international travel has been to BLR, I've done the MEL-BLR trip via most intermediate ports - be it SIN (most preferred), BKK, KUL, HKG, and once even AUH. Once I even paid a "surcharge" of ~$200 cash as well as a worse connection, just so I could fly the SQ A380 ex-MEL.

As time passed, I'd while away any spare time by jumping on Flight Radar/FlightAware and search up airlines/routes that flew the A380 and would search what cities they'd connect. Then follow this up with watching take-off/landing videos of the giant beasts. It's an engineering marvel how such a massive tube of steel, carbon fibre and fuel can take-off/land with such grace.

The obsession with the A380 of course came about by the desire of premium travel (as I'm sure would be the reason as most in this thread). The sheer size and space available in the A380 allows airlines to really go all-out when designing their premium cabins, and SQ, for example, has really used the size of the A380 well in this regard.

It will be a sad day indeed when the last A380 touches down, as premium travel just won't be the same again. Sure there'll be other aircraft with suites/apartments/mansions on board, but they'll never be able to replace the A380. Loved by avgeeks, hated by bean counters.

Than that super WOW feeling I experienced when SQ first made R Savers available - I grew to love old R on SQ 380 like it was my second home - just love it - would readily trade the hideous new R on 380 for old R any day.

Yes I agree, have flown the old R on SQ218 almost a month ago exactly, and I can see why you'd call it your second home. I'm hoping to do the same, though on hops to LHR/FRA/JFK as opposed to your hops to PEK/PVG

 

[Cruiser Elite]

Yes I agree, have flown the old R on SQ218 almost a month ago exactly, and I can see why you'd call it your second home. I'm hoping to do the same, though on hops to LHR/FRA/JFK as opposed to your hops to PEK/PVG

Oh not only PEK/PVG cobber - throw in dozens of flts to LAX/LHR/CDG/FRA/ZRH and invariably in 3C with or without the Ette in 3D.

 

[MathNerd]

Oh not only PEK/PVG cobber - throw in dozens of flts to LAX/LHR/CDG/FRA/ZRH and invariably in 3C with or without the Ette in 3D.

You're really a SQ Suites man, CE. Hands down. Much respect!
3C/D (even 2C/D) is definitely the dream combo boarding pass pair!