Air France A380
- Thread starter DeepFriar
- Start date
Man, I remember how ground breaking they were/are and all the technical achievements that had to take place for them to take flight.
That's a darn shame.
That's a darn shame.
No doubt the A380 is a technical marvel. Airbus just miscalculated on what the future of air travel was going to be. Until the pandemic it was shifting to more direct flights instead of prioritizing hubs. That plus fuel costs which are always a gamble
Not as dramatic as the 747 I thought, but still quite an achievement. Hey, two row of windows. That's some cattle car!
Last edited:
Here's who else flies them. Funny how the French bailed on their own joint venture partnership.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Snagglefoot
Here's who else flies them. Funny how the French bailed on their own joint venture partnership.
That list is dwindling quick. Thai, Malaysia and Qantas had already started to retire their fleet. ANA got two from a order that Skymark had but cancelled due to bankruptcy. That was a way to gain additional Gates at Haneda which are at a premium. The 380 is being used exclusively on a Tokyo-Honolulu route with a passenger capacity of over 500. The pandemic put a damper on that though.
Here's who else flies them. Funny how the French bailed on their own joint venture partnership.
That list is dwindling quick. Thai, Malaysia and Qantas had already started to retire their fleet. ANA got two from a order that Skymark had but cancelled due to bankruptcy. That was a way to gain additional Gates at Haneda which are at a premium. The 380 is being used exclusively on a Tokyo-Honolulu route with a passenger capacity of over 500. The pandemic put a damper on that though.
JHZR2
Staff member
$450M a copy seems like a big cost to retire such a jet early.
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
Originally Posted by JHZR2
$450M a copy seems like a big cost to retire such a jet early.
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
Have flown on a few 747's and was even involed in some of it ceritfication testing at Everett, WA. Supported that plane as welll making what is called premask (Large stencils) used to paint the Aircraft. You have no comprehension how large this plane is until you stand between the landing gear lookin up at the belly.
$450M a copy seems like a big cost to retire such a jet early.
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
Have flown on a few 747's and was even involed in some of it ceritfication testing at Everett, WA. Supported that plane as welll making what is called premask (Large stencils) used to paint the Aircraft. You have no comprehension how large this plane is until you stand between the landing gear lookin up at the belly.
Originally Posted by JHZR2
=
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
I used to fly international quite a bit in the 90s for work, out of JFK. I had the opportunity to fly on 747s in many livery and configs, even some domestic-only configured ones in Asia (a little cramped!). I always loved flying on that plane and would try to swap my itineraries to get on one if it was practical/possible. I never flew on an A380; but I can see how people could become attached to them as I was/am to the 747.
I used to follow the aviation industry closely, and I recall when they were developing this, thinking to myself, "that's just not the economic way to go..." While I do not revel in their failure, I have to admit I expected it was a possibility and am not surprised.
=
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
I used to fly international quite a bit in the 90s for work, out of JFK. I had the opportunity to fly on 747s in many livery and configs, even some domestic-only configured ones in Asia (a little cramped!). I always loved flying on that plane and would try to swap my itineraries to get on one if it was practical/possible. I never flew on an A380; but I can see how people could become attached to them as I was/am to the 747.
I used to follow the aviation industry closely, and I recall when they were developing this, thinking to myself, "that's just not the economic way to go..." While I do not revel in their failure, I have to admit I expected it was a possibility and am not surprised.
I flew on it to and from Frankfurt to Johannesburg, SA with Lufthansa a few years ago. Hard to tell when it left the ground. It would just start rolling down the runway and seemed to gain speed very slowly but you couldn't tell when the wheels left the ground. It had a several cameras available to watch on the monitor that were placed around the outside of the aircraft. The view up the fuselage from the tail was the best.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by tcp71
I flew on it to and from Frankfurt to Johannesburg, SA with Lufthansa a few years ago. Hard to tell when it left the ground. It would just start rolling down the runway and seemed to gain speed very slowly but you couldn't tell when the wheels left the ground. It had a several cameras available to watch on the monitor that were placed around the outside of the aircraft. The view up the fuselage from the tail was the best.
I flew that same flight, same airline, about 5 or so years ago. I flew business class and the first leg was Houston to London on a brand spanking new 787 Dreamliner that had probably fewer than 10 flights under its belt. (United Airlines). It still had the new plane smell. Anyway, we transitioned in Frankfurt to the A380. It was amazing. However, the comfort and sleeping position of Luftansa's business class seating just paled in comparison to the 787. It was still very nice, though and the airplane felt very solid comparted to a very old United 747 I rode from Shanghai to Chicago in 2008. I think that 747 was near the end of its service life. It rattled and shook like crazy, but I still loved it.
But the A380 was 100% packed and you could really appreciate its capacity when de-planing and heading to customs with 500 other people. No way to avoid that long line. We flew two more legs in it, which I immensly enjoyed. Johannesburg back to Frankfurt, then Frankfurt back to Houston. Back to back 10+ hour flights. Not too many planes on which I'd want to do that. Btw, no fault of the A380, but United's business class food also blew away Luftansa's, which was wierd, to put it mildly.
I flew on it to and from Frankfurt to Johannesburg, SA with Lufthansa a few years ago. Hard to tell when it left the ground. It would just start rolling down the runway and seemed to gain speed very slowly but you couldn't tell when the wheels left the ground. It had a several cameras available to watch on the monitor that were placed around the outside of the aircraft. The view up the fuselage from the tail was the best.
I flew that same flight, same airline, about 5 or so years ago. I flew business class and the first leg was Houston to London on a brand spanking new 787 Dreamliner that had probably fewer than 10 flights under its belt. (United Airlines). It still had the new plane smell. Anyway, we transitioned in Frankfurt to the A380. It was amazing. However, the comfort and sleeping position of Luftansa's business class seating just paled in comparison to the 787. It was still very nice, though and the airplane felt very solid comparted to a very old United 747 I rode from Shanghai to Chicago in 2008. I think that 747 was near the end of its service life. It rattled and shook like crazy, but I still loved it.
But the A380 was 100% packed and you could really appreciate its capacity when de-planing and heading to customs with 500 other people. No way to avoid that long line. We flew two more legs in it, which I immensly enjoyed. Johannesburg back to Frankfurt, then Frankfurt back to Houston. Back to back 10+ hour flights. Not too many planes on which I'd want to do that. Btw, no fault of the A380, but United's business class food also blew away Luftansa's, which was wierd, to put it mildly.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Flown in all of the above … still say they buy the seats 3rd party and decide how many to put inside … was starting to see more and more 1-2-1 configurations when things shut down …
Hard to guess what's going to be out there 5 years from now …
Hard to guess what's going to be out there 5 years from now …
They are interesting planes to fly in. I always try to fly new plane just to see. End up appreciating 767-300 as you do not share space with small city. I cannot guesstimate how many times I crossed the Atlantic in 767-300, but for me was always favorite plane except A340-600, which I really like due to excessive number of lavatories (at least in Lufthansa configuration).
Originally Posted by JHZR2
$450M a copy seems like a big cost to retire such a jet early.
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
Don't forget the money that airports spent to accommodate the A380.
The A380 deserves respect, but it wasn't the game changer the 747 was, and subjectively, it will never match that plane's graceful lines. Watching the A380 in the air, it seems to lumber along, looking much like a flying double-decker bus. I'm sure that it's great onboard, and given the chance, I'd like to find out, but I find it hard to warm up to.
That said, the forces that are pushing the A380 out also affect the 747, and the chances to ride on one as a passenger are decreasing. There were few takers for the 748, so unless you happen to be going to Germany, Korea, or China, the latest will be hard to come by. The rest of the 744s still in service are aged, and may not provide a state-of-the-art experience, and given the duration of the routes they fly, novelty probably takes a back seat to comfort, like one would get on a modern aircraft like a A350/380 or 787. I was skeptical of the promises, but after riding a 787, it really was a better and less stressful experience, even compared to something more recent like a 777.
$450M a copy seems like a big cost to retire such a jet early.
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
Don't forget the money that airports spent to accommodate the A380.
The A380 deserves respect, but it wasn't the game changer the 747 was, and subjectively, it will never match that plane's graceful lines. Watching the A380 in the air, it seems to lumber along, looking much like a flying double-decker bus. I'm sure that it's great onboard, and given the chance, I'd like to find out, but I find it hard to warm up to.
That said, the forces that are pushing the A380 out also affect the 747, and the chances to ride on one as a passenger are decreasing. There were few takers for the 748, so unless you happen to be going to Germany, Korea, or China, the latest will be hard to come by. The rest of the 744s still in service are aged, and may not provide a state-of-the-art experience, and given the duration of the routes they fly, novelty probably takes a back seat to comfort, like one would get on a modern aircraft like a A350/380 or 787. I was skeptical of the promises, but after riding a 787, it really was a better and less stressful experience, even compared to something more recent like a 777.
" It was still very nice, though and the airplane felt very solid comparted to a very old United 747 I rode from Shanghai to Chicago in 2008. I think that 747 was near the end of its service life. It rattled and shook like crazy, but I still loved it."
I used to fly on a Northwest Orient 747 that did that as well. The overhead bins would shake and rattle from takeoff to landing. This was going from Seattle to Seoul Gimpo in the 90's. Earplugs or noise cancelling headphones were a necessity.
Maybe United got a hold of that aircraft?
I used to fly on a Northwest Orient 747 that did that as well. The overhead bins would shake and rattle from takeoff to landing. This was going from Seattle to Seoul Gimpo in the 90's. Earplugs or noise cancelling headphones were a necessity.
Maybe United got a hold of that aircraft?
The A380 is or was supposed to be the cheapest per seat mile to operate. It's estimated between $40-46 per seat mile. From what I've heard and read from aviation personnel it's roughly $26,000 per hour to run and can cost airlines $17,000 per hour in fuel. From what I've seen medium bodied aircraft are expected to and to some degree are already becoming the defacto for the future.
Off the top of my head, in all my years of travel, I think I've only been on 2 A380s; a Qantas and an Emirates. The Qantas was a long while back, and I don't recall much of it, but the Emirates trip was back in 2016 in business class. It was a decent experience, and the bar at the back of the upper deck was pretty awesome. Their economy class was also decent, having tried it a year earlier, but not much home to write about compared to the higher tiers.
Although I am, and always have been, a huge 747 fan, it's sad to see the A380 go. I'm just surprised there wasn't a freight version of it available for such a big aircraft.
Although I am, and always have been, a huge 747 fan, it's sad to see the A380 go. I'm just surprised there wasn't a freight version of it available for such a big aircraft.
I could count on one hand the number of times I have flown , so I am no expert .
Being an American , I have always rooted for Boeing . And considering Airbus is subsidized by some of the European governments , not for me .
Being an American , I have always rooted for Boeing . And considering Airbus is subsidized by some of the European governments , not for me .
Originally Posted by Or
Originally Posted by JHZR2
=
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
I used to fly international quite a bit in the 90s for work, out of JFK. I had the opportunity to fly on 747s in many livery and configs, even some domestic-only configured ones in Asia (a little cramped!). I always loved flying on that plane and would try to swap my itineraries to get on one if it was practical/possible. I never flew on an A380; but I can see how people could become attached to them as I was/am to the 747.
I used to follow the aviation industry closely, and I recall when they were developing this, thinking to myself, "that's just not the economic way to go..." While I do not revel in their failure, I have to admit I expected it was a possibility and am not surprised.
I remember a interview with a Boeing rep at the paris air show,"we think its too big".
They were introducing or planning the 767 at the time.
Originally Posted by JHZR2
=
Ive always wanted to fly on a 747, but that's tough. This one would have been pretty neat too... I've seen quite a few at JFK and LHR.
I used to fly international quite a bit in the 90s for work, out of JFK. I had the opportunity to fly on 747s in many livery and configs, even some domestic-only configured ones in Asia (a little cramped!). I always loved flying on that plane and would try to swap my itineraries to get on one if it was practical/possible. I never flew on an A380; but I can see how people could become attached to them as I was/am to the 747.
I used to follow the aviation industry closely, and I recall when they were developing this, thinking to myself, "that's just not the economic way to go..." While I do not revel in their failure, I have to admit I expected it was a possibility and am not surprised.
I remember a interview with a Boeing rep at the paris air show,"we think its too big".
They were introducing or planning the 767 at the time.
Originally Posted by WyrTwister
I could count on one hand the number of times I have flown , so I am no expert .
Being an American , I have always rooted for Boeing . And considering Airbus is subsidized by some of the European governments , not for me .
Last I checked Boeing's quality control is no where near your "government subsidized airline". Between the 737, the us military constantly complaining about not only quality, but the numerous times during maneuvers that random nuts and bolts, or random stuff would come flying out. You couldn't pay me any amount of money to fly on any of those planes. I always make sure when I book it's a airbus. Go watch the documentary on767s being built in I believe Oklahoma by people on drugs.
Ya Boeing all the way!
I could count on one hand the number of times I have flown , so I am no expert .
Being an American , I have always rooted for Boeing . And considering Airbus is subsidized by some of the European governments , not for me .
Last I checked Boeing's quality control is no where near your "government subsidized airline". Between the 737, the us military constantly complaining about not only quality, but the numerous times during maneuvers that random nuts and bolts, or random stuff would come flying out. You couldn't pay me any amount of money to fly on any of those planes. I always make sure when I book it's a airbus. Go watch the documentary on767s being built in I believe Oklahoma by people on drugs.
Ya Boeing all the way!
Similar threads
