So, the A380 has finally taken to the skies.The BBC website referred to Boeing concentrating on medium range aircraft. Does this mean that they have effectively recognised that they cannot compete with Airbus in the future development of long range aircraft?David

>So, the A380 has finally taken to the skies.>>The BBC website referred to Boeing concentrating on medium>range aircraft. Does this mean that they have effectively>recognised that they cannot compete with Airbus in the future>development of long range aircraft?>>DavidFirst off, this should be in the Hangar Chat forum. Secondly, I can see this one with a big lock real quick.I guess the 777-200LR's range of 9,420 NM doesn't count as LONG RANGE?! Also the 788 range of 8,500 NM must be medium range as well :-roll With the 772LR being the longest range commercial airliner it makes me wonder where you get your facts from and the motives behind your post?Cheers,JohnBoeing 727/737 & Lockheed C-130/L-100 Mechanichttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/ng_driver.jpg

Indeed she does. What a majestic sight and marvellous achievement for Europe and the World. I just hope people recogise it as such and not become embittered due to the rivalry between Boeing & Airbus, and the US & EU.Congratulations Airbus. A well deserved place in the history books of aviation.Del.

Yes, congratulations to Airbus on a successful first flight of the A380. That being said, the original post started the A vs B theme without facts and that is what I provided.Cheers,JohnBoeing 727/737 & Lockheed C-130/L-100 Mechanichttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/ng_driver.jpg

Totally agree with you John. Nobody can argue. However I doubt anybody is thinking in those terms as you watch this fabulous new arrival depart!Looking foward to the 787 next!Del.

Thx for sharing the fact. It's 5:30a in my neck of the woods, so I'm hunting for the video. :D As for BBCs comments (if they did make the observation). Fixer is quite correct in the range advantage of the 777-200LR; perhaps they meant 'capacity'? I don't know, and personally, I don't care. Aviation is aviation to me, and this is a giant milestone (no pun intended). Let's see if this gamble of theirs actually works.It'll be a time before commercial ops start, but better tell the wife to start researching her flight benefits: I wanna ride.PS - This all brings to memory a quote of Charles Grodin from the movie 'Midnight Run'............... "IT'S TOO BIG!!!" LMAO:-hah

And just watched the landing - the aircraft was magnificent in flypast/landing - WOW!!!Any lingering doubts about her looks are gone for me - she's gorgeous!!!Commere you bignose fat girl!!!!! :-bluegrab regards,MarkXPHomeSP2/FS9.1/3.2HT/1GIG/X700pro256

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!Hats off to the engineers.From what I heard, Boeing is gambling that the future of air travel will involve more aircraft from different, smaller volume airports. Like my "home field" of KABE, between Philly Int. and JFK. From the thread (Is air travel going backwards?) about how jetways at many major airports are full and buses are used to load aircraft, there seems to be some sense to it. They aren't retreating from long range aircraft or discontinuing the 747. I worked at KABE as an inflight caterer, most people used to larger airports were pleased with their experience there. 11 jetways, no buses unless a charter chooses to use them and a runway Air Force One and Candidate Bush's 767 have used.Airbus obviously thinks there is enough continuing potential for large aircraft to support the A380. Personally I would rather fly out of airports like KABE, which the A380 will almost certainly never serve. Big enough for a tower and well-equipped emergency response crews, but most delays are caused by conditions at other airports.The A380 IS a magnificent engineering achievment.:-wave