Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

edition.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 254 posts

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#141

Post by xvilka »

bluGill wrote: post #76
tracker1 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would suggest that trains would probably be the better alternative, with similar features.

Same problem - because of the time spent on the train the airplane is still cheaper, even before you account for people willing to spend extra for the faster flight.

Well, if you take countries like Japan or China with their high speed railways, it takes also less time to check-in, board, the most basic security checks; moreover, often train stations are located in the city, as opposed to airports outside. So it is not a clear cut.

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#142

Post by ggm »

daurnimator wrote: post #135
ggm wrote: post #127

I think Airbus can survive this. The other aircraft are selling well. If they have to write down sunk cost it won't sink the company. Boeing has basically had to walk from the 747 and even the presidential flight will be using otherwise available shells (I believe) QANTAS didn't survey its passengers to make this decision. Had they asked the recurring business flyer, I suspect the signal would have been different, ev…

> the 787 is a compromised experience in the air. Why do you say that?

Dense seating in economy, is the sole reason. The airlines decided to ignore the Premium trend, and made economy basic as densely packed as they can, and provide limited premium economy to guarantee it had high margin and was full. So, business and premium on a 787 is great, but economy is really really tragically bad, as a long-haul experience.

787 for shorthaul, nobody cares. Ask anyone who sits in the cheap class about 787 for >10hrs, compared to the 747 economy, or the 380 economy experience.

The lower effective air cabin flight height (higher pressure, moister air) and the new lighting, and bigger windows are very good for everyone, But the shrinking seat, shrinking legroom, lack of aisle access, the shrinking toilet? very bad.

I fly premium and business. I am empathising what I am told, not what I live. I've flown 15h+ flights up front in a 787 and it was fantastic. Some of the best flights I've had over trans polar landscapes. Amazing. Sucks to be poor.

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#143

Post by nordsieck »

akfanta wrote: post #22
Someone1234 wrote: post #3

I totally understand why big aircraft (A380, 747, etc) are disappearing commercially but I will miss them. Flying in a larger aircraft makes one feel less like cargo, in particularly for airlines that offer places to stretch your legs (e.g. "bar" seating, showers, staircases, etc). I was always kind of secretly hoping large blimps would return. And we'd get to choose between 7 hours in a tiny metal tube with the seat…

> I totally understand why big aircraft (A380, 747, etc) are disappearing commercially but I will miss them. Just curious, why do you think they are disappearing? I thought they still have lower cost/passenger, especially for long haul?

The A380 is in a particularly difficult position because of its width. It requires an upgraded (expensive) terminal. This limits the airports it can service, further marginalizing it.

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#144

Post by duxup »

joezydeco wrote: post #124
ak217 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't miss the A380. I will miss the 747 because of how uniquely majestic it looks. https://www.airliners.net/photo/China-Airlines/Boeing-747-40...

You need to visit the Lufthansa 747-200 that's on display at the Technik Museum in Speyer, Germany: http://www.rodbearden.com/Av13/Speyer/Boeing%20747-200%20D-A...

It appears to have a slide....

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#145

Post by chrischen »

Someone1234 wrote: post #3

I totally understand why big aircraft (A380, 747, etc) are disappearing commercially but I will miss them. Flying in a larger aircraft makes one feel less like cargo, in particularly for airlines that offer places to stretch your legs (e.g. "bar" seating, showers, staircases, etc). I was always kind of secretly hoping large blimps would return. And we'd get to choose between 7 hours in a tiny metal tube with the seat…

Blimps were large overall, but pretty sure the actual passenger area was still tiny.

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#146

Post by ams6110 »

Someone1234 wrote: post #3

I totally understand why big aircraft (A380, 747, etc) are disappearing commercially but I will miss them. Flying in a larger aircraft makes one feel less like cargo, in particularly for airlines that offer places to stretch your legs (e.g. "bar" seating, showers, staircases, etc). I was always kind of secretly hoping large blimps would return. And we'd get to choose between 7 hours in a tiny metal tube with the seat…

I don't see anyway blimps ever return for passenger travel. Too slow and too inefficient. For luxury travel with beds and showers and fine dining, trains would be far more practical.

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#147

Post by jesterson »

danepowell wrote: post #123
Someone1234 wrote: post #3

I totally understand why big aircraft (A380, 747, etc) are disappearing commercially but I will miss them. Flying in a larger aircraft makes one feel less like cargo, in particularly for airlines that offer places to stretch your legs (e.g. "bar" seating, showers, staircases, etc). I was always kind of secretly hoping large blimps would return. And we'd get to choose between 7 hours in a tiny metal tube with the seat…

I love the A380 as an aerospace enthusiast, but absolutely despise it as a passenger. In my experience (with Lufthansa), the boarding process is chaotic and takes forever, the seat pitch is minimal in economy, and never have I felt more like cattle than when sharing the situation with 700 other passengers. I'm curious how your experience as a passenger sounds so different from mine.

Seats are arranged by the carrier, not the AirBus itself. Seat pitch in Singapore Airlines and Emirates is quite comfy

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#148

Post by AceyMan »

FabHK wrote: post #120
positr0n wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As a result of its size, passengers were asked to crowd together on one side or the other to help make turns." That's amazing

Somewhat unrelated, I’ve been wondering for a while whether all pax in concert moving to the front/back of the cabin could bring a jet out of its flight envelope. There’s one or two related aviation stack exchange questions (that I’ve contributed to, IIRC), but I’ve never seen an informative authoritative account.

Abso-freaking-lutly. The permitted range for the CG (longitudinally) — denoted as "% of MAC", for Mean Aerodynamic Chord — is quite narrow, and you prefer to stay away from the "edges" of that range whenever possible.

The distribution of pax and baggage are chosen so as ensure its within the range. IOW, they don't book Row 1 then 2 then 3, etc, — sold seats are sprinkled across the aircraft as it's filled.

I've been told when the flight attendants are moving forward and back with the beverage service you can watch the trim wheel turn as the autopilot maintains correct AOA.

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#149

Post by Theodores »

Symbiote wrote: post #138
Theodores wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With one flying over my house right now I don't believe they are heading for the boneyard any time soon. For London Heathrow there is no better plane for the operator with not that many slots. Nowadays there are budget airlines using budget airports with very long taxi rides to somewhere useful. You can't argue with price. Yet right now we are in an age of cheap oil that facilitates this. Had we not had the taps full…

> part of England that was changed to be Wales so that an EU development grant could be obtained. Is that true? I see the border was last changed in 1972, but that's well before the EU and regional development funding was thought about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/England%E2%80%93Wales_border

I can't remember the Tory Brexiteer that signed it off, but it is essentially the Wirral, as in Merseyside, not Wales as we know it. Sadly I am out of touch with politics these days to have the recall of what went on as it was a while ago when I paid attention to these things. There was a fiddle there though and it wasn't way back in the 1970's.

Re: A380 cancellations by Qantas raise new questions about the superjumbo's future

#150

Post by bobthepanda »

ulfw wrote: post #134

Very sad, having flown the A380 many times and it even once saved my life due to it’s masterfully engineered airframe and systems (uncontained engine explosion, the only accident A380 ever had). It seems we aren’t able to build anything great or unique anymore without it failing in the market (Concorde, A380). More cattle class mediocraty flying on 737s from the 60s and 3-3-3 seating 787s etc

Boom and others are trying to re-enter the supersonic space with smaller jets.

The main problem with Concorde was that it couldn't fill up seats at the ticket prices being charged, and transatlantic subsonic flights were both more comfortable at the equivalent ticket price, and at the flying time sweet spot of 6-8 hours, which is long enough to just sleep and wake up in the morning.

Had SSTs come of age in the '80s and had a range closer to 6000nm, then they probably would've taken off for transpacific flights. 6000nm from HNL gets you to pretty much all of East Asia, Singapore, and the entirety of North America.

Post reply on HN