Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production • Hacker News Board

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#161

Post by psergeant » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:16 AM UTC

jsjohnst wrote: post #145

ggm wrote: post #114

I am a frequent business flyer, 10+ per year international long haul from Australia. I appreciate that from a north american perspective the 380 didn't make sense either economically from the economy which bankrolls Boeing, or strategically from the economy which has specific interests in international flights homed out of its east and west coast population centres. I can tell you that for the South Pacific, Japan, I…

I question anyone who would chose any other plane over the 787 if they had a choice, especially for long haul flights. My sinuses are night and day feeling better after a flight on a 787. That alone makes up for any annoyance with the windows or other minor inconveniences people frequently quote. > its not 11 abreast pack-em-in which is what the 787 has done Citation needed! I just checked every airline’s seating con…

This is true of all the modern fleet, A350, A380, and the 787, in my extensive experience.

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#162

Post by Zombieball » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 5:19 AM UTC

jsjohnst wrote: post #145

ggm wrote: post #114

I am a frequent business flyer, 10+ per year international long haul from Australia. I appreciate that from a north american perspective the 380 didn't make sense either economically from the economy which bankrolls Boeing, or strategically from the economy which has specific interests in international flights homed out of its east and west coast population centres. I can tell you that for the South Pacific, Japan, I…

I question anyone who would chose any other plane over the 787 if they had a choice, especially for long haul flights. My sinuses are night and day feeling better after a flight on a 787. That alone makes up for any annoyance with the windows or other minor inconveniences people frequently quote. > its not 11 abreast pack-em-in which is what the 787 has done Citation needed! I just checked every airline’s seating con…

I think you even cut the quote short...

> In business, its not 11 abreast pack-em-in which is what the 787 has done

“In business” as in business class? Most 787 I’ve been on are 1-2-1 reverse herringbone in business.

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#163

Post by ralusek » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 6:28 AM UTC

spookyuser wrote: post #34

rdtsc wrote: post #3

I like to use A380 as an analogy when a team works to perfect a product, adds lots of features, rewrites it a few times with the latest most buzzword-compliant technology, tests it until it is absolutely perfect, and ships it. ... Only to find out by that time the market has moved on and nobody wants to buy that kind of a thing anymore. Pretty sure that's a common theme for companies which end up on https://ourincred…

I know this is slightly off topic, but this just happened to me recently. I wanted to make a stupid website that let you make those Ajit Pai memes where he was eating popcorn in front of a green screen. I managed to get the basics working in less than a day somewhere during mid december, but only ended up publishing it nine days ago. The meme was totally dead and the only actual function of the site was in teaching m…

Alright, let us at least screw around with it, please.

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#164

Post by jzl » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 6:38 AM UTC

mixmastamyk wrote: post #149

_s wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP but I will go out of my way to select Airbus jets; their NVH is noticeably lower than Boeings jets, which results in a far more comfortable travel, especially long-haul (A380 being up there in terms of comfort).

NVH?

I had to google it too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise,_vibration,_and_harshnes...

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#165

Post by kalleboo » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 6:53 AM UTC

jsjohnst wrote: post #145

ggm wrote: post #114

I am a frequent business flyer, 10+ per year international long haul from Australia. I appreciate that from a north american perspective the 380 didn't make sense either economically from the economy which bankrolls Boeing, or strategically from the economy which has specific interests in international flights homed out of its east and west coast population centres. I can tell you that for the South Pacific, Japan, I…

I question anyone who would chose any other plane over the 787 if they had a choice, especially for long haul flights. My sinuses are night and day feeling better after a flight on a 787. That alone makes up for any annoyance with the windows or other minor inconveniences people frequently quote. > its not 11 abreast pack-em-in which is what the 787 has done Citation needed! I just checked every airline’s seating con…

Most of my flights these days are on ANA 787's and I honestly can't feel any resulting difference in the humidity/pressurization even though I'm told it's there.

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#166

Post by thaumasiotes » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 6:57 AM UTC

holografix wrote: post #140

HeavenFox wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it really hard to agree with you. Maybe you flew exclusively in business or first class? > its not 11 abreast pack-em-in which is what the 787 has done 787 is designed for 8-abreast seating. In reality, carriers almost always went for 9-abreast. 11-abreast is physically impossible. It is possible in an A380 though, and airlines are really considering it. > ... and its a premium quality experience How is flying…

All the “gets longer” reasons you state here are solved by the “add more staff” and “use more exits” options. I also live in Australia and have flown both the Dreamliner and A380 and if possible will always choose the A380. Far roomier plane, much quieter and even though it may be just a coincidence every time it seems to suffer far less turbulence.

> All the “gets longer” reasons you state here are solved by the “add more staff” and “use more exits” options.

No. Longer immigration queues could be solved by the government adding more staff, but they cannot be solved by the airline adding more staff, and the airline is the one buying or otherwise choosing to use the plane.

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#167

Post by thaumasiotes » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 6:59 AM UTC

jsjohnst wrote: post #145

ggm wrote: post #114

I am a frequent business flyer, 10+ per year international long haul from Australia. I appreciate that from a north american perspective the 380 didn't make sense either economically from the economy which bankrolls Boeing, or strategically from the economy which has specific interests in international flights homed out of its east and west coast population centres. I can tell you that for the South Pacific, Japan, I…

I question anyone who would chose any other plane over the 787 if they had a choice, especially for long haul flights. My sinuses are night and day feeling better after a flight on a 787. That alone makes up for any annoyance with the windows or other minor inconveniences people frequently quote. > its not 11 abreast pack-em-in which is what the 787 has done Citation needed! I just checked every airline’s seating con…

> I just checked every airline’s seating config for the 787 and all are either 3-3-3 or more rarely 2-4-2 in economy.

Is "economy" a more expensive tier? It doesn't seem to make sense that the cheaper tier would give more space per passenger.

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#168

Post by Theodores » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 6:59 AM UTC

ggm wrote: post #114

I am a frequent business flyer, 10+ per year international long haul from Australia. I appreciate that from a north american perspective the 380 didn't make sense either economically from the economy which bankrolls Boeing, or strategically from the economy which has specific interests in international flights homed out of its east and west coast population centres. I can tell you that for the South Pacific, Japan, I…

If you live under the London Heathrow flight path then the A380 makes a lot of sense. Despite many airlines operating point to point services rather than hub and spoke there are places like London Heathrow where a lot of people want to get to and there are not enough plane slots for everyone.

I do not believe that Heathrow is uniquely congested. These few airports, even if there are only five or so that have the same problems, are enough to necessitate some level of on-going A380 production. Simply put, without an A380 then you are not going to find it so easy to get the best Heathrow slots or enough of them for your passenger numbers. Ryanair won't be investing in A380s any time soon or planning to operate from Heathrow with other big planes but all of the former 'flag' airlines that go into Heathrow have the best plane for the job in the A380.

Incidentally I am amazed at how many more Airbus planes fly into Heathrow than Boeing. Particularly with the smaller jets, A320 size the equivalent Boeing planes seem relatively rare. Imaginably they are on a different flight path.

I also fully expect that there are public relations companies with vested interests in saying that the A380 is doomed. I am sure there were public relations companies telling the world the plane was going to sell 4x more than it did.

Despite the hubris of the market I am sure that there are some sensible people in Airbus that work to different market expectations than the salesmen and can appreciate the passenger perspective cited by yourself as well as the realities for folk who live in places close to the likes of London Heathrow. The demand is solid if not as big as first advertised and these big planes have a big future. Which is sad if you are green minded and consider the level of travel a bit silly.

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#169

Post by thaumasiotes » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 7:07 AM UTC

double0jimb0 wrote: post #15

Interning at Boeing in 2005, when the Dreamliner was still 2-3 years away from production, I asked a BD manager if Boeing was worried about A380 (the burning question at the time was "Who is going to win, A380/Airbus or Dreamliner/Boeing"). Without pause, he said "Not worried at all, A380 serves the hub and spoke model, which is dying. People hate layovers, they want more direct flights." Not a hard insight to grasp,…

> People hate layovers, they want more direct flights.

But the fact that people hate layovers is a tool that airlines use for price discrimination. I just searched priceline.com for one-way flights to PVG on February 20. SFO to PVG nonstop is $640 and up. LAX to PVG with a layover in SFO is $594.

Re: Airbus A380, Once the Future of Aviation, May Cease Production

#170

Post by thaumasiotes » Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 7:12 AM UTC

geezerjay wrote: post #74

double0jimb0 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Passengers are cost AND travel-time/hassle sensitive. It appears Airbus didn't place enough value into the "travel-time/hassle" part. More detail: the Dreamliner is 20% more efficient than previous generation planes. This allowed airlines to "break" the major hubs into many quicker/easier direct flights at a price that passengers are willing to pay. Boeing bet increasing value in this manner was superior than Airbus'…

Passangers are sensitive to travel time but the constraint is placed firmly on cost, particular on major tourism destinations where airports are already saturated. Furthermore, some international and national air travel networks are in fact organized in a hub and spoke pattern, particularly trans-oceanic flights where demand is high and cost is the main competitive advantage, including business travel. It's easy to c…

> just like it's very easy to pick yesterday's lottery numbers

It can be harder than it appears. Never forget the poor Chinese guy who noticed that the winning lottery numbers were announced before the close of ticket sales, and got thrown in jail for his pains.