Airbus A380: So big; it's useless.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
K1052

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,150
37,481
136
Airbus is in very serious troble with the A380 production delays. The freighter version looks to be going tits up with the loss of the FedEx order and several others now flagging. The passenger models are already two years behind schedule for delivery and I'm sure their current orderholders are flogging discounts out of Airbus not to pull their orders and head across the pond to Boeing who they know can build a proven, competitive aircraft.

Their answer to the 787, the A350 , is impressing nobody and won't be available for delivery until 3-4 years after the 787 starts to be delivered to airlines. The cash crunch caused by the internal problems and 380 progam delays have even put the 350 in doubt so much Airbus is considering surrendering that segment of the market to Boeing for a while.

Looks like Boeing's estimation that most airlines will prefer mid sized, fuel efficent aircraft over the superjumbo for the most part was correct. Even worse for Airbus it that Boeing is to incorperate 787 technology into the veteran 747 line, which won't requitre totally new training for pilots.


 
D

dmw16

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 2000
7,608
0
0
I am guessing from your posts that you know very little to nothing about aircraft design. I work for a company that supplies components to Boeing and as a result I have followed the issues the A380 is having. But yes, there is a market. No, cargo isn't really the best use for the A380 as it's floor loading capabilities limit it's payload capacity (as opposed to it's payload capacity being limited by max takeoff weight). The next thing in cargo is probably the 747-8.

As for the civil engineer's comment - I dont know that the A380 is going to be that much heavier than the 747. The 747 is a largely metallic aircraft, where the A380 is largely composite, but I'd have to look that up (the weight that is) to know for sure.
 
K1052

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,150
37,481
136
Originally posted by: dmw16
I am guessing from your posts that you know very little to nothing about aircraft design. I work for a company that supplies components to Boeing and as a result I have followed the issues the A380 is having. But yes, there is a market. No, cargo isn't really the best use for the A380 as it's floor loading capabilities limit it's payload capacity (as opposed to it's payload capacity being limited by max takeoff weight). The next thing in cargo is probably the 747-8.

As for the civil engineer's comment - I dont know that the A380 is going to be that much heavier than the 747. The 747 is a largely metallic aircraft, where the A380 is largely composite, but I'd have to look that up (the weight that is) to know for sure.
Click to expand...

The A380 is still mostly aluminum IIRC. It does incorporate composites but is still mostly metal (like their other aircraft).

Given the experience Boeing is gaining on the 787 program with composites I don't see why they couldn't achieve substantial weight savings as well with the 747-8.
 
Specop 007

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
Originally posted by: dmw16
I am guessing from your posts that you know very little to nothing about aircraft design. I work for a company that supplies components to Boeing and as a result I have followed the issues the A380 is having. But yes, there is a market. No, cargo isn't really the best use for the A380 as it's floor loading capabilities limit it's payload capacity (as opposed to it's payload capacity being limited by max takeoff weight). The next thing in cargo is probably the 747-8.

As for the civil engineer's comment - I dont know that the A380 is going to be that much heavier than the 747. The 747 is a largely metallic aircraft, where the A380 is largely composite, but I'd have to look that up (the weight that is) to know for sure.
Click to expand...

Just because you supply components to Boeing doesnt mean you understand airplanes either. If you work in the IT department I'm betting your aviation knowledge is limited.
Are you an engineer or are you in accounting?

Aside from that, theres ALWAYS a market for SOMETHING. Hell, I could sh1t in a can and sell it to someone. The question is if its profitable.
 
foghorn67

foghorn67

Lifer
Jan 3, 2006
11,883
63
91
Originally posted by: dethman
omg i'll bet everyone at airbus wishes they had consulted with you before they built and engineered the craft. they would NEVER have thought of all these things prior to building such a plane. thank THE LORD JESUS we have you to show us the light.
Click to expand...

ummm. He was not the only one to think that when it was announced. Some of the best critics said it was a niche aircraft that will hard time reaching the break even point.
 
A

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
Originally posted by: Calin
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
From a Civil Engineering standpoint:

Airport runways will have to be repaved and/or redesigned (lengthen) because the A380 is probably much heavier than a 747 Jumbo. Pavements aren't designed for A380 probably, and will require more maintanence.



I guess airlines could make use of it IF they fill the planes with passengers. A lot of flights are pretty empty these days.
Click to expand...

I've heard the 380 has lower pressure on pavements (more/bigger wheels) than the 747. The problem would be some of the airports use overpasses which might not be strong enough to support an A380.
Click to expand...

From Wikipedia:

Max take off weight of a A380 = 560,000 kg

Max take off weight of a 747-8 = 439,985 kg

Even if you have bigger wheels, it's still 120,000 kg more weight to support.

The new Atlanta overpass they built can support 1 million pounds (don't quote me on that, I read it somewhere else).
 
Kerouactivist

Kerouactivist

Diamond Member
Jul 12, 2001
4,665
0
76
I think the plane is kinda cool and was probably a good idea at the time but airbus screwed it up....with the constant delays....
All the purchasers are going to get huge discounts now and airbus pretty much put their ass on the line with this plane...some are just canceling their orders and ordering from Boeing...

It's kinda of unfortunate though Airbus looked like it had a pretty bright future due to the huge sucess of their A320 program....

IMO The future of commercial flying is more in step with Boeing's 7E7 and it's high fuel economy....
 
B

B00ne

Platinum Member
May 21, 2001
2,168
1
0
Originally posted by: foghorn67
Originally posted by: dethman
omg i'll bet everyone at airbus wishes they had consulted with you before they built and engineered the craft. they would NEVER have thought of all these things prior to building such a plane. thank THE LORD JESUS we have you to show us the light.
Click to expand...

ummm. He was not the only one to think that when it was announced. Some of the best critics said it was a niche aircraft that will hard time reaching the break even point.
Click to expand...

A niche market? Pretty much every international flight I've been on has been a 747 - so I guess it aint that much niche...
 
Aharami

Aharami

Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
21,205
165
106
If I had an order with Airbus right now for the A380, I'd wanna pull out too because I'd be very concerned with quality issues. All their customers are renegotiating for lower prices. That coupled with the delays means that Airbus is losing even more money. They are laying off employees and making the leftover employees work extra. Im sure with all the extra work, each employee will make more and more mistakes. Also Airbus is cutting corners to save money wherever they can. All this means more defects making into the final product.
 
Mermaidman

Mermaidman

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
7,987
93
91
The concept is good, the implementation has sucked.

And if one loaded A380 crashes, there will be a public over-reaction and the entire fleet will be scrapped.

Trollin'?
 
C

CVSiN

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2004
9,289
0
0
most airports have plenty oif runway room for it... its the taxiways and passenger handeling you have to upgrade...

C5 still bigger and can still land at most international airports that handle jumbos..
just cant park it anywhere near a terminal.. same problem with the airbus
 
CaptnKirk

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
The plane has use in two exclusive markets:

1) Mass Transportation in countries like China, India, Middle East - anywhere that it makes sense to use large transportation vehicles
to move large amounts of people on vacations or 'Pilgrimages' to Mecca, the Holy Land, or 'Super All-Inclusive Vacation Packages'.
It's cost effective when you move entire herds of cattle or people from one area to another.

2) Cargo transportation - that's where it would shine, the ability to carry lots of perishable goods quickly,
before it spoils, to all the greeedy SOB's that think that they must have their instant gratification.
Rapid transport of high value equipment, goods and supplies to an eager consumer sector.
Just think how valuable it would have been to rush all those PlayStation 3's and Wii's to the Video Game Fanatics last weekend.
 
H

Howard

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
47,982
10
81
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
The plane has use in two exclusive markets:

1) Mass Transportation in countries like China, India, Middle East - anywhere that it makes sense to use large transportation vehicles
to move large amounts of people on vacations or 'Pilgrimages' to Mecca, the Holy Land, or 'Super All-Inclusive Vacation Packages'.
It's cost effective when you move entire herds of cattle or people from one area to another.

2) Cargo transportation - that's where it would shine, the ability to carry lots of perishable goods quickly,
before it spoils, to all the greeedy SOB's that think that they must have their instant gratification.
Rapid transport of high value equipment, goods and supplies to an eager consumer sector.
Just think how valuable it would have been to rush all those PlayStation 3's and Wii's to the Video Game Fanatics last weekend.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that there would be room to spare in the A380 if you packed in it all the PS3s and Wii produced so far.
 
foghorn67

foghorn67

Lifer
Jan 3, 2006
11,883
63
91
Originally posted by: B00ne
Originally posted by: foghorn67
Originally posted by: dethman
omg i'll bet everyone at airbus wishes they had consulted with you before they built and engineered the craft. they would NEVER have thought of all these things prior to building such a plane. thank THE LORD JESUS we have you to show us the light.
Click to expand...

ummm. He was not the only one to think that when it was announced. Some of the best critics said it was a niche aircraft that will hard time reaching the break even point.
Click to expand...

A niche market? Pretty much every international flight I've been on has been a 747 - so I guess it aint that much niche...
Click to expand...

800 passengers vs 400-500ish
 
foghorn67

foghorn67

Lifer
Jan 3, 2006
11,883
63
91
Originally posted by: Calin
I've heard the 380 has lower pressure on pavements (more/bigger wheels) than the 747. The problem would be some of the airports use overpasses which might not be strong enough to support an A380.
Click to expand...
It's lower than the 777-300, which has the most pressure.

 
T

thomsbrain

Lifer
Dec 4, 2001
18,148
1
0
yes, everyone will have to walk to the plane because there is no such thing as a bus. and many airports don't already use buses to move passengers from where they got off their plane to where they need to be. so obviously everyone will have to walk and it will be horrible. WHY did engineers invent the plane without inventing the bus first? WHAT were they thinking?
 
rudder

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Originally posted by: theknight571
I think a plane like this will work out just fine on the long haul routes.

Many of the airports I've been to need to upgrade anyway... lol
Click to expand...

The problem is most airports have been around very long and cities have grown up around them. With the exception of Denver International. Not too many airports can simply add length to their runways.

I think there will be a makret for these airplanes. And the boarding time issue is nonsense. Airports can adapt easily and use multiple entrances to move people on and off quicker.

The only issue I can think of if the demand will be begin enough to make airbus a return on thier investment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom