Sad day goodbye A380

[scrunge49 3]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47231504

 

Probably inevitable but sad to see never the less,

 

 

Edited February 14, 2019 by Jim Young
Activated the link.

[anden145 2,284]

30 minutes ago, scrunge49 said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47231504

Probably inevitable but sad to see never the less,

Yearh... well, in my personal opinion (and I'm probably quite alone with that), I never really liked or cared for the A380.

It's ugly, completely lacking the grace and beauty of the 747 and apparently unnecessary given the future of the aviation business.

Personally I couldn't see a market for it and I'm - to be a little cruel - happy to see it go.

(Now, roast me!) 😄

Edited February 14, 2019 by Anders Bermann

[YMMB 234]

19 minutes ago, Anders Bermann said:

Yearh... well, in my personal opinion (and I'm probably quite alone with that), I never really liked or cared for the A380.

It's ugly, completely lacking the grace and beauty of the 747 and apparently unnecessary given the future of the aviation business.

Personally I couldn't see a market for it and I'm - to be a little cruel - happy to see it go.

(Now, roast me!) 😄

So I guess you never flew in one, because anyone that has would not necessarily agree with you. I've flown Qantas YMML to KLAX in both an A380 and reverse in B744, a B788 YMML to Abu Dhabi then to Paris in an A380 and the A380 was the better passenger experience each time.  And I'm saying this as man in love with the B744/748.

Edited February 14, 2019 by YMMB

[thibodba57 462]

I have flown in one. Emirates Business class. It was comfortable, but nothing different than I have experienced in any number of aircraft.  The 78 however is the exception to the rule now.  It walks circles around any aircraft in the long range market.

 Good riddance to the A380.  The flying forhead is ugly, it hasn't lived up to its promises by Airbus, and that 'Super' has cause enough mayhem on airport infrastructure for absolutely no gain.

[Rhinozherous 90]

I think the A380 is very beautiful. There is no better way of packing 4 engines and wings onto a two story building and let it fly. 

They stop building new ones but I am glad that we still see it fly for a few years. He is just ahead of time and I think in the far future there will be planes with a similiar concept. 

[vc10man 732]

1 hour ago, YMMB said:

So I guess you never flew in one, because anyone that has would not necessarily agree with you. I've flown Qantas YMML to KLAX in both an A380 and reverse in B744, a B788 YMML to Abu Dhabi then to Paris in an A380 and the A380 was the better passenger experience each time.  And I'm saying this as man in love with the B744/748.

Agree with you because I have flown in it UK-Dubai; Melbourne-Dubai; as well as all the other gamut of 744s, 757s, 757s, A320s, etc, etc. Okay, looks may not win beauty competitions, but for the load factor, which is far more important to any airline in a business to make a profit, it delivers. And I have found it to be a very pleasant, comfortable aircraft to be flying long distances in.

Unlike folk I meet in a travel agency, who ask me 'oh, but why isn't airline so-and-so offering me cheaper fares?' 'What, at peak times? Oh.I forgot. They only exist so that passengers like you can get cheap fares as and when you demand, eh?'

[Christopher Low 5,332]

I think that the A380 is a very elegant aircraft, and I am sorry to hear this news. There will always be a place for four engine long haul airliners in my book. Maybe not economically, but certainly aesthetically.

Edited February 14, 2019 by Christopher Low

[ErichB 3,638]

It's so ironic in a world where pilot demand is increasing, passenger number are ever higher, that the largest people carrier is no longer viable economically due to lack of demand. But the economics is quite simple.  2 engines are better than 4 (these days)

Very approx fuel burns per hour (long haul)

777-300ER: ........7.5 t/h

747-8: .......10.8 t/h

A380:  .....12.2 t/h

B787-9  ......5.4 t/h
.

 

 

[srce 57]

2 hours ago, ErichB said:

777-300ER: ........7.5 t/h

747-8: .......10.8 t/h

A380:  .....12.2 t/h

B787-9  ......5.4 t/h

What's that per person?

Edited February 14, 2019 by srce

[ErichB 3,638]

8 minutes ago, srce said:

What's the per person?

For long haul:  (many other variables here, but approx)

777-300ER.....3 ltr/100km/seat

B747-8......2.82ltr/100km/seat

A380......3.16ltr/100km/seat

B787-9....2.49ltr/100km/seat

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft

 

 

[EastFB72 16]

Really sad to hear this

Always made a point of flying the A380 with Singapore Airlines whenever I flew out to Australia or New Zealand

Loved the plane and remember seeing it for the first time, thought it looked far too big and clumsy to get off the ground

[scianoir 610]

Although this news wasn't altogether unexpected, I also was very sorry to hear it. Although the A380 would certainly not win any prizes in an airliner beauty contest, I still really like it and I too think it actually looks quite elegant particularly when it is off the ground. I guess part of the attraction for me lies in the amazing technological achievement which this aircraft demonstrates as the largest passenger carrying airliner ever developed. However the decision by Airbus to go down the pathway of a new very large 4-engined aircraft was probably not the wisest one and the timing was wrong, as Tom Enders more or less admitted. In the end, like quite a few other airliners, its economics have been its own downfall.

Like it or not however, the A380 will continue to have an iconic status as the largest passenger airliner ever to go into regular airline service and hopefully it will be around for quite a few years more. Whether we will ever see a quality simulated version is however another question.

Bill

 

[Adrian123 1,015]

8 minutes ago, scianoir said:

A380 would certainly not win any prizes in an airliner beauty contest

Setting at Vienna airport and watching a 380's taxi, I thought they were rather beautiful and majestic. Though airlines don't choose aircraft for their esthetics. 😉

[jon b 2,041]

1 hour ago, scianoir said:

 

Like it or not however, the A380 will continue to have an iconic status as the largest passenger airliner ever to go into regular airline service and hopefully it will be around for quite a few years more. Whether we will ever see a quality simulated version is however another question.

Bill

 

Probably not “ quite a few years more” as the first ones are already being retired at just over 10 years old, and I doubt there’ll be a rush to turn them in to freighters like you can with a 20 year plus 747.

i don’t like them personally, they’re always in the way either blocking localiser signals or taxiways.

[Paraffin 2,197]

8 hours ago, ErichB said:

It's so ironic in a world where pilot demand is increasing, passenger number are ever higher, that the largest people carrier is no longer viable economically due to lack of demand. But the economics is quite simple.  2 engines are better than 4 (these days)

It wasn't just the fuel economics though. It wasn't a good fit for existing airport infrastructure either. 

I never flew on one, but just on appearance I think it's not a good-looking aircraft. The 747's forward bulge managed to look unique and appropriate for something that large. The 380 just looks bloated to me. Or maybe I'm just biased, with the 747 being around for so many years.