Passengers love the A380 for its space, the decent number of lavatories in the economy cabin (forget first class as no one on a normal income can afford it) and its four engines. On the other hand, company executives don’t like the A380. They would prefer to cram passengers onto a narrow body aircraft with two engines and two lavatories for 160 odd passengers - better economics which is all they’re really interested in.
Agreed, but if BA points out that the expected 11 daily passenger flights from London to Los Angeles can be done with only 6 flights using the A380, those same company executives will immediately do a full 180.
Seems to me that if you own a 380 it makes sense to use it as long as you can, rather than spend a lot of money on smaller aircraft which also means more crews are needed.
Lot more complicated than that. If they lose money on it because of costs and not being able to consistently fill them it make sense to get rid of them. It's extremely expensive to operate and very limited in the markets it can operate profitability. It's always very expensive to update cabins since they are so customized.
Some other countries doesn't have runway large enough to accomodate this giant. In my country we can'y even afford runway for boeing dream liner, Let alone A380.
The A380 uses alot more fuel than 2 engine 787 or A350. Fuel costs (especially with Ukraine war) are more cost than crew cost. Though I like the A380 as its more comfortable
The A380 when full cost more per passenger than the smaller newer airliners when full. They are not fuel efficient, and their maintenance is high due to the 4 engines. It only makes sense when and airport has too many take-offs and landings, and must increase the number of people on each flight instead of the number of flights.
Also, the A380s customers have taken the total opposite approach that I was expecting. I thought they would just say NAH! to any amenities Airbus offered such as indoor showers, massive luxury bathrooms, inflight bars and huge private bedrooms. I was wrong. All of the above have been installed on A380s owned by carriers like Emirates and Singapore. I really hope to get a chance to fly on it one day.
One thing that I highly noticed when I was onboard was about its stability in the air. You don’t get much turbulence as small aircraft. Love this giant airplane ✈️ ❤
The A380 is fabulous to fly on. Will it make a comeback? That may depend on airport congestion. Heathrow is unlikely to get a 3rd runway, so bigger planes are the only way to meet demand. Other airports may also have slot availability difficulties too. We also need to await the US review of passenger needs and safety where cramped economy class seating is likely to be highly criticised. Requiring airlines to give wider seats and more legroom might make aircraft choices change for bigger planes. That the A380 is quiet and has short runway requirements might make an updated version appealing. Of course Airbus will want to make money and will need a big order book, Emirates have already asked Airbus to think about it, maybe with newer materials and lessons learnt from the A350 they can get a new plan built more efficiently.
The A380 strongly reminds me of the famous 314 flying boats. They were the "A380s" of their day. These monsters had everything: a dining area, separate bedrooms and a lounge for passengers. I'm glad the A380 brought all of those back to the skies. I hope to be able to fly on it some time soon...
The problem with the A380 was no American Airline bought any and not all American airports have been adapted to accommodate it. The aircraft is best suited to long haul travel. I have flown on the A380 once. Loved it. Big aircraft.
@@mmm-mmm Clearly you've never traveled on one. I've flown 380's both business and economy on several different airlines, as a passenger, it is without doubt the quietest and most comfortable airliner I have ever known in 35 years of global travel.
Not just that, I’m sure there were export red tape with it being a foreign company and America being Boeing’s territory. Only reason why A220 can be sold to US companies is because it’s created in USA. A220 is a major blunder for Boeing, who sought to use red tape to their advantage to lockout the market
This is by far the best news ever. The Airbus A380-800 is my favorite, they are very comfortable quite smooth. Just to say this is an incredible airplane ✈️
One overloooked side of the A380 is the very positive effect it had on the Airbus brand. It really made Airbus visible, even to people with no real interest in airplanes.
But Airbus' cash cow is the A320 series - a very versatile plane which dominates its sector outside the US (where the 737 still reigns). A320 variants carry many more passengers many more miles than all other Airbus planes.
@@kenoliver8913 I think that the A320's time is running out fast. Its younger cousins the A350 and A220 are ready to take a huge chunk of the market from the 320. I've flown on the 340 as well. I think the A330 brought about its demise as it could move almost as many people while vastly outperforming it in fuel economy. In fact the 330 took over so rapidly in some parts of Europe that I couldn't fly on the 340 any more. The airlines had moved to the 330 for long term maintenance cost control. You can't argue against a trans-Atlantic plane that has only two engines but can carry a whopping 420 passengers. It would be the way of the future with the exception of the A380. Sadly, I will never see the graceful A340 fly again. The two airlines that I flew with had dropped it from their aircraft inventories to save money. I'm sure they went with an A330 NEO or something similar.
@@largol33t1 The A220 may hurt the small 320 variants but that's no problem for Airbus. Having got the 220 for free they make more profit from one of them than from a 320. The A350 is a big widebody and is no competition for the 320 - a totally different niche.
You are out of date on the Qantas re-introduction of their A380 fleet. They are being upgraded (the 2 oldest are not being brought back) and the few back in service so far are running at capacity.
The problem is that there isn't a big enough engine to power something that big with just 2 of them, and you also have to factor that airlines don't need a large jet like that. The 777X for example hasn't even gotten a single order from an American Airline yet, so I don't think that would work out.
You are Right about Qantas Management treatment of its customers being totally inadequate!. The A380 is most suited for passengers given the large distance to many of the of Australians popular destinations. But that Idea of an airline centered around customer service and satisfaction is not what the Senior management deem to be appropriate. Looking forward to seeing A380 in our skies and more carriers returning to Australian routes.
James Dillon 0 seconds ago EMIRATES A-380 is the most amazing experience of my lifetime!! I was fortunate to fly "first class" on the A-380 every month for 5 years from Toronto to Dubai to work in the desert of Iraq for the best company on earth!! SHELL GLOBAL!! Truly an amazing experience!! I was a member of the EMIRATES "platinum club" and was treated like a king!! Truly an amazing experience!! The service. the lounges and the employees were truly "AMAZING"!! The best experience of my lifetime!! These folks were incredible!! The definition of "FIRST CLASS" treatment!! EMIRATES in a word is truly "AMAZING"!! Greetings from Canada!! GIDDYUP!!
With the realistic upcoming growth of all electric short haul aircraft, I believe the hub and spoke format will again be favorable. Put you long haul aircraft into limited airports running SAF or in the future potentially hydrogen with the necessary infrastructure. Then fly your spoke to regional airports on all electric. Petter at Mentour Now did a recent video that is very interesting
Airbus ended production of the A380 in 2021 - the last A380 was delivered to Emirated Airline in December 2021. So if airlines want more A380s... they will have to find someone else to manufacture them, which seems very unlikely.
I've been on an A380 three times and they're great. Economy doesn't feel like cattle class. Moreover as AirBus pushes Hydrogen, the airports that can support the A380 are the only ones capable of adopting Hydrogen in the short term. Hence AirBus' use of the A380 as the test bed for their Hydrogen testing campaign.
These are businesses, you know? I'd say safety was still paramount as it is mission critical for these organisations. I think the record of the aviation industry would bear that out.
There's only so much of a comeback it can make when they aren't making them anymore. And before anyone says "the airlines can just order some more then" it's not a simple matter of that. Typically when the production run of a large airplane like this reaches its expected end, the jigs, tooling and machinery used to build it is recycled, rather than left sitting around taking up space. This then cements the end of production, since restarting production at that point would involve rebuilding the tooling first, which would make the production run super expensive. Ergo I'd say the existing a380s are all we're going to get. They will stay in service for perhaps 25 - 30 years, then when their hull life times out they will be retired, and that will be all she wrote for the a380.
I'm an A380 fan; it's an amazing aircraft, BUT it was too late to the widebody market and came at a time when passenger numbers declined and more cost-effective twin-engined aircraft, particularly the 787-9 and now the A350 have come onstream. The FAA change to restrictions upon twin engined flight paths is also a factor... And of course they did this as the 747 was being retired and the A380 demand was growing. Coincidence? I think not
New composite wing that folds, New engines, revised vertical stabilizer that is smaller, fuselage stretch, and move the cockpit to the second floor and add a nose door for cargo. Point-to-point travel is increasing, but The Hub and spoke model is still very much relevant. You can't have a gate for a plane going everywhere in the world. There's going to be a few flights going to a packed hub.
Cargo is never viable on the 380 due to its "double bubble" fuselage design; the floor of the upper deck is fully structural. Plus moving the cockpit requires massive redesign and difficult recertification - so much so that you may as well just do a clean sheet design. Note the 747 was designed as a freighter FIRST (they were originally after a USAF contract), with passengers an afterthought; that's actually why its cockpit is so high up.
Qantas never had a bar upstairs, but regardless, it's a far more comfortable aircraft to the 787. The 787 (outside of business class) is cramped as hell. It certainly fits the name "Dreamliner" once you realize that a nightmare is also a dream. Everyone crams 9 across in the 787 with the notable exception of JAL. (Who's also the ONLY carrier that I'll get on a 787 given the choice). The A380 truly is a remarkable aircraft. I'm sad to see it going away.
Most sales of the 747-8 were the Freighter version so they didn’t affect the sales of the A380. I believe both aircrafts still had a future with the A380 for passengers and the 747-8F for cargo.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The 747 has proven itself to be the best passenger jet ever made, and the airbus is unnecessary and overkill, especially considering that it can't fly everywhere due to the special accommodations that have to be made at airports in order to make it work. The airbus isn't designed to fit at most terminals, and it's extremely expensive to make it happen.
I can definitely confirm many A380s flying overhead (mostly BA) I live in the west of Ireland and seem to be on a major route from London to North America ( flightradar24 is the best!)
Glad this has been posted, it was bugging me too. American pronunciation is weird sometimes. I recently watched Aquaman, and all through the film the other characters referred to him as "Ahquamahn" 🤦♂
Singapore 🇸🇬 Airlines have Redeployment of the Giant Airbus A380s for its Daily Singapore 🇸🇬 to London, Sydney and New York JFK besides Smaller Efficient Airbus A350XWB-900 and 900ULR om othernlong haul Flights.
A380 is a great aircraft to fly on - comfortable, stable, higher air pressure in the cabin leading to less fatigue, I still think productin could ahve continued - it will be useful for places where airlines have hubs which have limited slots (becoming a problem for places like dubai and definitely a problem at Heathrow). Also likely to be an issue in China and Asia in time. Stopping production was an error I think. One problem though was having the low cockpit makes it harder to convert to a cargo aircraft.
6:11 from what I know most first class passengers are business travelers who don't book that much in advance so I doubt that there are already so many bookings made months in advance that they won't get a seat anymore. The change involves some planning, so it's not like thy don't know that they will change it until a few weeks before. Also in general I think that the market of first class travelers is rather small, many airlines use only economy and business even on long haul, so even if they lose some costumers because the first class of the 787 has less luxury thN the A380 it probably doesn't make so much difference that it makes the A380 more economical for them, otherwise they wouldn't do the switch.
Not too bad, but a lot of inconsistencies in this video and many shortcuts taken. Frequency between LHR and LAX is bad news for the A380 as customers demanding frequency are shunning the A380. You can't pronounce Qantas. I don't think BA is a 'staunch' A380 supporter - relative to the size of their fleet, their commitment to the A380 was light. The A380 and its fortunes have little to do with Winter schedules. Is it Winner 2023 or Winter 2023 on your graphics? Qantas' decision to ditch the A380 on the Melbourne to LAX route is not baffling and it is well explained by the airline: they will be back when they have bought all of their A380s back in to service and is therefore only temporary whilst they focus on the premium SYD/LAX and LYD/LHR routes. The 787s do not have 8 first class seats, they have none. The plural of aircraft is aircraft, not aircrafts. Just a few things that have been picked up. A little more research will go along way...
A380 is a passengers favorite. Unfortunately it is only economical to use on a few routes. At the end of the day airlines have to make a profit. The 787, A350 and 777 are what a majority of airlines find economical to operate. I know will get slated by the Airbus fanatics but Boeing read the market right and rejected the joint venture to develop a super jumbo. Boeing has made lots of mistakes since but they were right on this one.
The commenter forgot to mention that BA has A380 service from London to Dallas, TX. It draws such a crowd that the airport police have to rush out and keep people/photographers from the fence as the blast from the engines is pretty strong. I'm sure they can pick up a truck and throw it 50 feet without effort.
@@neilturner6749 I will be continue to be correct or pompous as an uneducated person might call it. As for being a '' twat '' I am lead to believe that this word has some meaning in a minority dialect know as british english. I don't concern myself with the usage of uninteresting backwaters.
An airworthiness directive for wing spar cracks was released on 11 May, which will delay return to service of the A380. The cracks are related to hydrogen embrittlement resulting from longterm storage in desert environments.
I wonder whether it would make any economic sense to re-engine existing A380's with new RR Ultrafan once this engine is available. Installing new, more efficient, engines on existing, aging airframes is common practise in the military fleets : KC-135, C-5, B-52, are some exemples. It is much less usual in the civilian domain, strangely. My guess is that this is because of the sorter lifetime of the airframes (more glight hours per years) and more difficult certification. The only large-scale exemple I know of is the DC-8 : scores of DC-8's were re-engined with CFM56.
when the A380 was designed most airlines were flying with small aircraft from lokal airports to Hubs and from hub to hub with large aircraft , but with the extendet range version of smaller aircraft more airliner went with small aircraft betwin smaller airports avoiding the large costst of the hubs and have a point to point flight , that killed the verry large aircraft like the 747 and 380 of , and the largest desireble plane was the 777 , and now the 787 and A350
@@jayvee8502 Engine for 2x engine version shall have at least 700kN of thrust. There is no such engine for now. Also one 700+kN will have greatee diameter than current RR Trent 970 turbofan. This would require another type of fuselage that has top mount of wing to fuselage like in Antonov An-225. This is completely different aircraft that has nothing to do with A380.
@@alexanderbelov6892 That's the problem. The design itself was intended to be a 4 engine aircraft. Converting it to an 2 engine aircraft is not possible even if there is an engine powerful enough to power a A380 with just a pair. In today's econmics airliners with 4 engines are less efficient to operate.
Probably CFM's new engine "Rise" will resurrect this giant. CFM used A380 to test the new open rotor engine. They might have a plan to power A380s with the new super efficient engines
I believe most airlines these days that are in the market for widebody a/c might find better use with the A350 if the airline is not smitten with the Boeing option. Again I do NOT see many airlines making the 380 have a comeback.
@@neilturner6749 Is that the case? The narrator's first language is not English? If so then as someone doing this on what is effectively a professional basis (the channel generates income) he should be looking for critical review of his performance as it comes over too often as pompous and verbose. Additionally some of the content is doubtful. All of that has certainly turned me off watching.
00:40 - Literally using a picture of the last KLM 747 that was permanently retired for commercial passenger flight when it flew flight KL896 on 25-10-2020.
What an uninformative fluff piece. I am glad that it was, at least, cheerfully delivered, though it all fits in once sentence: "We like A-380 because big is cool." I agree. It is fun and spacious to fly on. Every airline? Ahem, no. No American carrier has any desire or use for the super-jumbo. Heavily-Traveled routes are this machine's specialty because it cannot be flown profitably, without very high load factors that, unfortunately are temperamental and seasonal, why Emirates also has a fleet of 777 aircraft. Emirates does well with the A-380 because the geography uniquely supports some heavily traveled hub and spoke routes. Parking and Storing the huge airplane, for everyone else half the year, is a huge expense, which is why of those who own them, most prefer to err on the side of having just enough or slightly less of aircraft in service. Emirates would like to buy some A-380 Neos. For Tim Clark "Neo" means same, BUT burns less fuel, which translates into a more efficient engine, unfortunately, that does not exist. None of our engine-makers are interested in his "neo" program, because there were only 252 airplanes built, a closed, small market for an engine that would not suit any other airplane. Engine-makers are likewise not interested in a 757 re-engine program, even though over 1000 airplanes were built. What we see is two awkward spots in the market, the middle (757 and 767-200 passenger capacity) and very high capacity, over 400, and NOT with four engines.
The seats on the Asiana a380 were the most uncomfortable seats I've ever sat in on an airliner. I flew a 13.5 hr flight and my butt started hurting 1 hr into the flight.
An A380 can carry over 800 passengers if the seat space is the same as a standard 747. An A380 with seating for 500 passengers allows much more space per passenger.
With airports wanting to ban four engine aircrafts I don't see this happening unless Airbus somehow are able to convert them with GE90s for a twin engine. This would be an enormous task. Not only is it a very difficult design change, but it would need new flight worthiness licences as well.
Hey if Boeing can continue to fit ever larger diameter engines on to its old dinosaur 737 body, I'm sure Airbus can manage the switch from 2 to 4 engines 🙂
@@bobdobalina838 or to two engines :) But I wonder if it isn't better to release a new aircraft instead. Newer technology and since it needs new licensing anyway it might not be worth it to keep the A380 alive. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Every airline would NOT need an A380. The 380 was a great idea at the very wrong time in airline history. Airbus wanted to outdo the 747 and well, we saw the end result.
Just my opinion but airbus shot themselves in the foot not making a cargo variant. Passenger jumbos were already on the way out when they introduced the 380 but they built it anyway. No big surprise they're already being scrapped.
But the shot in the foot happened at design time - they went for a "double bubble" pressure vessel in the fuselage and a lower set cockpit which both make cargo conversion impossible. Unlike the 747 which was designed as a freighter first capable of passenger conversion, not the other way around.
Funniest video i've seen in weeks. The AI program you used to make this video is short on the "I". aircrafts? comftorbility? the orders seem to cease? slipping demand was more of a financial cause? kantas? where the a380 is notorious? for some reason the demand for air travel naturally decreased? several international travelers? the horde of orders? when demand picks up at the end of 2020 and the winter of 2023? etc, etc, etc... Also, the a380 didn't fail because of ticket prices, it failed because people didn't want to fly to 'hubs' and then take connecting flights to their destination. In addition, airlines are only bringing them back because they discovered they can't sell them, so they need to make something from them instead of letting them sit around and rot.
If I were an airline exec I would tailor the aircraft to be ultra luxury. Target the ultra high net worth individuals who would otherwise fly in a private jet. I'm talking multi person suites, full internet connectivity, bathrooms, lounges etc. Make the entire plane catered to high end users and run them on high capacity routes like Dubai - London, or Paris - New York, Singapore - Dubai, any route where lots of ultra rich people will travel. Then you can charge whatever you like for the experience safe in the knowledge that people with that much money will pay whatever the price to fly in that level of comfort. Also it would mean Holywood A listers will fly commercial jet instead of private without having to rub shoulders with the great unwashed. Meaning bonus "Sustainability" points. You could even make it chartered, flying in celebs for events like Wimbledon, or Indy500 or whatever.
Bro … this video makes no sense Melbourne/Sydney to LA is a route where it makes the most sense to remove an a380, it’s got competition from virgin, UA, American and delta. It is also 15 hrs so a more efficient aircraft makes a lot of sense and most travellers are going business or economy. Also UA, American both operate 787 on that route and delta and virgin 777 so makes total sense … also Lufthansa is not a direct competitor to “kantas”
This seems a very confused story. Airlines want the A380 because of its efficiencies in operation, then countered with airlines wanting to switch to twin engine equipment, then that they’re preferring the 747 … and so it goes on. If we exclude freight operators, the 747 is now an unusual sight. And of course the switch to twin engine was due to greater adaptability with lower PAX numbers … it take a lot of people to fill an A380 … but they are now back. Not so sure of the space as he airlines still pack you in, but the reduced noised levels are nice and the ‘nasty hiss’ of the 777 is gone
That shot of the Thames River in London was gross, i read not so long ago that a lot of raw sewerage goes into that river because ghe sewerage system was originally built for 2.5 million people and now there are 12 million people living there.
Untrue. The river is cleaner now than it has been since early Victorian times. London has an advanced and sophisticated wastewater transport and treatment system, continually being updated.
@@frglee 68000 hours of raw sweage overflow into the Thames area reported in 2021, over 2 billion litres in two days in October 2020. Very sophisticated.
Swooosh! Swooosh! Swooosh! What possessed your video editor to insist on a rushing arrow sound to accompany each screen transition? The effect is distracting, particularly as the somewhat choppy, meandering narative unwinds.
RR is developing an absolutely massive Ultrafan, supposedly for the military strategic airlifter market. Its so big they've had to build a new extra-large development and test facilty for it. But a lot of people think that it is actually for a clean-sheet twin engine A380 replacement Airbus is supposed to have its skunk works working on. Both companies are playing their cards very close to their chest though, so no-one knows.
Airbus might install the new LEAP engines derived from the legendary CFM 56 (reached a billion flight hours this year) ,made much less fuel hungry & polluting and cheaper to build to airlines who wish to 're-use' their A380 airplanes for shorter flights ,not just ultra long hauls..
for emirates the 777 for connecting flights the 777 is used for the last flight bc not all passengers will fly to Dubai for connection some will stay so less passengers for the last flight in the connection
The A380 is the most beautiful plane ever build but Boeing change the market but companies will cry for A380 in the future is just a bold project that Airbus needs to do again in something never seen in the sky
Airlines need the same number of pilots for an A380 as they need for a 737, and they have an increasingly limited number of pilots. The Dreamliner is more fuel efficient but the A380 is more labor efficient.
The A380 has always been a superlative aircraft. It will continue for d3cades to come. I'm only half way through, having to leave the stream, sadly, now. So, if I mention something actually covered past the 50% elapsed time mark, my apologies. First, the 747's cessation of production must have something to do with the A380's 'rediscovery'. Second, 'cuz I'm not clar on this: has Airbus restarted production (he said, knowing full well how difficult and expensive that would be? Third, the 747 notwithstamding, the airline flying passenger does NOT like radical change.....or even MILD change. Concorde fits the bill on that story as a systemic example. I'll leave out the question of competitive cost. Bottom line: you can make more money flying diminished fleet numbers (more bums, more seats, less aircraft by putting the A3i0's on a high-numbers route. Your example of London to LA is spot on. Last (Thank Gawd), Airbus has done a damn fine job over this now quarter-century long process to sell the A380 as the safest passenger aircraft in the skies. Not one crash or catastrophic accident in the entire plwne's career. The safest airplane in the skies. How, just wait until SpaceX incorporates as an airline, and begins to offer regularly scheduled suborbital major passenger route! I'm a good socialist, but the societal impact of the advent of THAT market will be fun to watch.
Passengers love the A380 for its space, the decent number of lavatories in the economy cabin (forget first class as no one on a normal income can afford it) and its four engines. On the other hand, company executives don’t like the A380. They would prefer to cram passengers onto a narrow body aircraft with two engines and two lavatories for 160 odd passengers - better economics which is all they’re really interested in.
I have flown first class only for the last 23 years. It’s very cool!
Agreed, but if BA points out that the expected 11 daily passenger flights from London to Los Angeles can be done with only 6 flights using the A380, those same company executives will immediately do a full 180.
so your thesis is that profitability is about lavatories per passenger? lol
@@derfss Yes, it is. Many airlines install more seats in their cabins, usually at the expense of utility space.
@@derfss I think the reference was to squished seats more than the also accompanying lack of toilets.
Seems to me that if you own a 380 it makes sense to use it as long as you can, rather than spend a lot of money on smaller aircraft which also means more crews are needed.
Lot more complicated than that. If they lose money on it because of costs and not being able to consistently fill them it make sense to get rid of them. It's extremely expensive to operate and very limited in the markets it can operate profitability. It's always very expensive to update cabins since they are so customized.
Some other countries doesn't have runway large enough to accomodate this giant. In my country we can'y even afford runway for boeing dream liner, Let alone A380.
The A380 uses alot more fuel than 2 engine 787 or A350. Fuel costs (especially with Ukraine war) are more cost than crew cost. Though I like the A380 as its more comfortable
The A380 when full cost more per passenger than the smaller newer airliners when full. They are not fuel efficient, and their maintenance is high due to the 4 engines. It only makes sense when and airport has too many take-offs and landings, and must increase the number of people on each flight instead of the number of flights.
Also, the A380s customers have taken the total opposite approach that I was expecting. I thought they would just say NAH! to any amenities Airbus offered such as indoor showers, massive luxury bathrooms, inflight bars and huge private bedrooms. I was wrong. All of the above have been installed on A380s owned by carriers like Emirates and Singapore. I really hope to get a chance to fly on it one day.
One thing that I highly noticed when I was onboard was about its stability in the air. You don’t get much turbulence as small aircraft. Love this giant airplane ✈️ ❤
Agree. Especially compared to the light 787.
The A380 is fabulous to fly on. Will it make a comeback? That may depend on airport congestion. Heathrow is unlikely to get a 3rd runway, so bigger planes are the only way to meet demand. Other airports may also have slot availability difficulties too. We also need to await the US review of passenger needs and safety where cramped economy class seating is likely to be highly criticised. Requiring airlines to give wider seats and more legroom might make aircraft choices change for bigger planes. That the A380 is quiet and has short runway requirements might make an updated version appealing. Of course Airbus will want to make money and will need a big order book, Emirates have already asked Airbus to think about it, maybe with newer materials and lessons learnt from the A350 they can get a new plan built more efficiently.
Keep flying the A380. Demand is going to boom over the next five years. Passengers are tired of being squeezed into smaller spaces like sardines.
Not true. A380 cost a lot to maintain. That is why four engine passenger airliners have been scrapped.
@Robert Parsons yes, cuz ur the most qualified person to say that
@@xxriellixx978yt3 Yes, I speak as a former sardine.
@@robertparsons313 and I speak as a current sardine 😭😂
Trust me, you feel pretty squeezed in in economy on an A380
I hope A380 can continue. Loved the plane since launch
The A380 strongly reminds me of the famous 314 flying boats. They were the "A380s" of their day. These monsters had everything: a dining area, separate bedrooms and a lounge for passengers. I'm glad the A380 brought all of those back to the skies. I hope to be able to fly on it some time soon...
I love 'aircrafts' equipped with 'comfortability'
like... just say 'comfort' lmao
@@StephenHogan ...and 'aircraft'
The problem with the A380 was no American Airline bought any and not all American airports have been adapted to accommodate it. The aircraft is best suited to long haul travel.
I have flown on the A380 once. Loved it. Big aircraft.
@@mmm-mmm because its damn comfortable by a long shot?
hope it becomes the norm.
@@mmm-mmm Clearly you've never traveled on one. I've flown 380's both business and economy on several different airlines, as a passenger, it is without doubt the quietest and most comfortable airliner I have ever known in 35 years of global travel.
Not just that, I’m sure there were export red tape with it being a foreign company and America being Boeing’s territory. Only reason why A220 can be sold to US companies is because it’s created in USA. A220 is a major blunder for Boeing, who sought to use red tape to their advantage to lockout the market
Quite telling too that no American airline bought the 777X also
I loved flying on the A380.
This is by far the best news ever. The Airbus A380-800 is my favorite, they are very comfortable quite smooth. Just to say this is an incredible airplane ✈️
One overloooked side of the A380 is the very positive effect it had on the Airbus brand. It really made Airbus visible, even to people with no real interest in airplanes.
But Airbus' cash cow is the A320 series - a very versatile plane which dominates its sector outside the US (where the 737 still reigns). A320 variants carry many more passengers many more miles than all other Airbus planes.
@@kenoliver8913 I think that the A320's time is running out fast. Its younger cousins the A350 and A220 are ready to take a huge chunk of the market from the 320. I've flown on the 340 as well. I think the A330 brought about its demise as it could move almost as many people while vastly outperforming it in fuel economy. In fact the 330 took over so rapidly in some parts of Europe that I couldn't fly on the 340 any more. The airlines had moved to the 330 for long term maintenance cost control. You can't argue against a trans-Atlantic plane that has only two engines but can carry a whopping 420 passengers. It would be the way of the future with the exception of the A380. Sadly, I will never see the graceful A340 fly again. The two airlines that I flew with had dropped it from their aircraft inventories to save money. I'm sure they went with an A330 NEO or something similar.
@@largol33t1 The A220 may hurt the small 320 variants but that's no problem for Airbus. Having got the 220 for free they make more profit from one of them than from a 320. The A350 is a big widebody and is no competition for the 320 - a totally different niche.
You are out of date on the Qantas re-introduction of their A380 fleet. They are being upgraded (the 2 oldest are not being brought back) and the few back in service so far are running at capacity.
The oldest one was destroyed in France at Tarbes-Lourdes airport. I saw her.
@@arielleblond6201 Destroyed is misleading, dismantled is more accurate with 90% recycled for spare parts or new construction.
We need a A360... a aircraft that is as large as a 747-8 .. or there abouts. As luxerius as the A380, but still only have two engines.
@@penguinus. wow this could solve global warming problems with one ingenious engine modification 😂
The problem is that there isn't a big enough engine to power something that big with just 2 of them, and you also have to factor that airlines don't need a large jet like that. The 777X for example hasn't even gotten a single order from an American Airline yet, so I don't think that would work out.
yes, boeing 777-10X
@@Spy_Agent5 well.. if it can be made lighter the 9x engines would work
first we need to start with learning how to spell luxurious
Son: Mum, when I grow up I want to be a pilot.
Mum: Sorry son, you can't do both.
Bro really said “KAntAs”😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Contas I think is how the knobber says it. Jesus Christ. 😂
You are Right about Qantas Management treatment of its customers being totally inadequate!. The A380 is most suited for passengers given the large distance to many of the of Australians popular destinations. But that Idea of an airline centered around customer service and satisfaction is not what the Senior management deem to be appropriate. Looking forward to seeing A380 in our skies and more carriers returning to Australian routes.
James Dillon
0 seconds ago
EMIRATES A-380 is the most amazing experience of my lifetime!! I was fortunate to fly "first class" on the A-380 every month for 5 years from Toronto to Dubai to work in the desert of Iraq for the best company on earth!! SHELL GLOBAL!! Truly an amazing experience!! I was a member of the EMIRATES "platinum club" and was treated like a king!! Truly an amazing experience!! The service. the lounges and the employees were truly "AMAZING"!! The best experience of my lifetime!! These folks were incredible!! The definition of "FIRST CLASS" treatment!! EMIRATES in a word is truly "AMAZING"!! Greetings from Canada!! GIDDYUP!!
It must be nice to see an amazing aircraft like the A380 back on the runways.
With the realistic upcoming growth of all electric short haul aircraft, I believe the hub and spoke format will again be favorable.
Put you long haul aircraft into limited airports running SAF or in the future potentially hydrogen with the necessary infrastructure.
Then fly your spoke to regional airports on all electric.
Petter at Mentour Now did a recent video that is very interesting
Airbus ended production of the A380 in 2021 - the last A380 was delivered to Emirated Airline in December 2021. So if airlines want more A380s... they will have to find someone else to manufacture them, which seems very unlikely.
I've been on an A380 three times and they're great. Economy doesn't feel like cattle class. Moreover as AirBus pushes Hydrogen, the airports that can support the A380 are the only ones capable of adopting Hydrogen in the short term. Hence AirBus' use of the A380 as the test bed for their Hydrogen testing campaign.
Talks about COVID; shows video of people doing a strep throat test LOL
A380 is the best plane to fly on and probably the safest but of course these CEOs are not interested in that. It’s all about money and profitability.
These are businesses, you know? I'd say safety was still paramount as it is mission critical for these organisations. I think the record of the aviation industry would bear that out.
With regards to CEOs I don’t think that’s true , Sir Tim Clark, wants Airbus to build more A380s.
There's only so much of a comeback it can make when they aren't making them anymore. And before anyone says "the airlines can just order some more then" it's not a simple matter of that. Typically when the production run of a large airplane like this reaches its expected end, the jigs, tooling and machinery used to build it is recycled, rather than left sitting around taking up space. This then cements the end of production, since restarting production at that point would involve rebuilding the tooling first, which would make the production run super expensive. Ergo I'd say the existing a380s are all we're going to get. They will stay in service for perhaps 25 - 30 years, then when their hull life times out they will be retired, and that will be all she wrote for the a380.
As a passenger I would choose the A380 every time for my long haul flights. Airframe before Airline in my book.
I'm an A380 fan; it's an amazing aircraft, BUT it was too late to the widebody market and came at a time when passenger numbers declined and more cost-effective twin-engined aircraft, particularly the 787-9 and now the A350 have come onstream. The FAA change to restrictions upon twin engined flight paths is also a factor... And of course they did this as the 747 was being retired and the A380 demand was growing. Coincidence? I think not
the decision was purely about engine reliability, which has been increasing with each generation of engines
⁹
New composite wing that folds, New engines, revised vertical stabilizer that is smaller, fuselage stretch, and move the cockpit to the second floor and add a nose door for cargo.
Point-to-point travel is increasing, but The Hub and spoke model is still very much relevant. You can't have a gate for a plane going everywhere in the world. There's going to be a few flights going to a packed hub.
Cargo is not competitive on the A380? Too much unused volume? So I knew
@@gabrieleporru4443 new wings would fix this issue. It’ll be lighter, weight, and generate more lift.
Cargo is never viable on the 380 due to its "double bubble" fuselage design; the floor of the upper deck is fully structural. Plus moving the cockpit requires massive redesign and difficult recertification - so much so that you may as well just do a clean sheet design. Note the 747 was designed as a freighter FIRST (they were originally after a USAF contract), with passengers an afterthought; that's actually why its cockpit is so high up.
Qantas never had a bar upstairs, but regardless, it's a far more comfortable aircraft to the 787. The 787 (outside of business class) is cramped as hell. It certainly fits the name "Dreamliner" once you realize that a nightmare is also a dream.
Everyone crams 9 across in the 787 with the notable exception of JAL. (Who's also the ONLY carrier that I'll get on a 787 given the choice).
The A380 truly is a remarkable aircraft. I'm sad to see it going away.
I love the design of this A380 plane. Large, Stable and Spacious. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
I hope it's true and the a380 is coming back, it's such a beautiful beast of a plane.
Most sales of the 747-8 were the Freighter version so they didn’t affect the sales of the A380.
I believe both aircrafts still had a future with the A380 for passengers and the 747-8F for cargo.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
The 747 has proven itself to be the best passenger jet ever made, and the airbus is unnecessary and overkill, especially considering that it can't fly everywhere due to the special accommodations that have to be made at airports in order to make it work. The airbus isn't designed to fit at most terminals, and it's extremely expensive to make it happen.
Why hasn't Etihad been mentioned in the video? I hear they are bringing the A380 as well!
The A380 has more space and a lot quieter than the 747, loved my flights with the A380. King of the sky's
I’m not sure what you’re smoking - but it must be strong bro!
I can definitely confirm many A380s flying overhead (mostly BA) I live in the west of Ireland and seem to be on a major route from London to North America ( flightradar24 is the best!)
What the heck is a A350-500?
Ikr, i think theres only A350-900 and -1000
He said 'aircrafts' multiple times and then there's 'comfortability' so anything is possible...
BTW Qantas has 6 A380's currently operating despite you saying the opposite.
The guy can’t even pronounce Qantas correctly so don’t expect him to get his facts right.
@@adamlee3772 Or Melbourne for that matter.
And Qantas has also chosen A350XLRs instead of the 787 for their new direct flights to Heathrow from Australia.
Qantas is pronounced Kwantas, and Melbourne is pronounced Melburn.
OMG I was about to comment on that😂😂.
Glad this has been posted, it was bugging me too. American pronunciation is weird sometimes. I recently watched Aquaman, and all through the film the other characters referred to him as "Ahquamahn" 🤦♂
I think Melbourne is pronounced halfway between Melburn and Melbin
Singapore 🇸🇬 Airlines have Redeployment of the Giant Airbus A380s for its Daily Singapore 🇸🇬 to London, Sydney and New York JFK besides Smaller Efficient Airbus A350XWB-900 and 900ULR om othernlong haul Flights.
the a380 is the best flying experience, it is smoother, quieter and more spacious than any other aircraft i have ever used
A380 is a great aircraft to fly on - comfortable, stable, higher air pressure in the cabin leading to less fatigue, I still think productin could ahve continued - it will be useful for places where airlines have hubs which have limited slots (becoming a problem for places like dubai and definitely a problem at Heathrow). Also likely to be an issue in China and Asia in time. Stopping production was an error I think. One problem though was having the low cockpit makes it harder to convert to a cargo aircraft.
Think the low cockpit was chosen to make it easier for pilots trained on smaller aircraft to adopt to & be trained on the A380
6:11 from what I know most first class passengers are business travelers who don't book that much in advance so I doubt that there are already so many bookings made months in advance that they won't get a seat anymore. The change involves some planning, so it's not like thy don't know that they will change it until a few weeks before.
Also in general I think that the market of first class travelers is rather small, many airlines use only economy and business even on long haul, so even if they lose some costumers because the first class of the 787 has less luxury thN the A380 it probably doesn't make so much difference that it makes the A380 more economical for them, otherwise they wouldn't do the switch.
Airlines going for 747 instead? Nonsense. They've also been retired in most major fleets.
Yeah that wasn’t the only random statement the narrator made, although TBF English clearly isn’t his first language so let’s not be too harsh here...
@@neilturner6749 See previous comment above.
Not too bad, but a lot of inconsistencies in this video and many shortcuts taken. Frequency between LHR and LAX is bad news for the A380 as customers demanding frequency are shunning the A380. You can't pronounce Qantas. I don't think BA is a 'staunch' A380 supporter - relative to the size of their fleet, their commitment to the A380 was light. The A380 and its fortunes have little to do with Winter schedules. Is it Winner 2023 or Winter 2023 on your graphics? Qantas' decision to ditch the A380 on the Melbourne to LAX route is not baffling and it is well explained by the airline: they will be back when they have bought all of their A380s back in to service and is therefore only temporary whilst they focus on the premium SYD/LAX and LYD/LHR routes. The 787s do not have 8 first class seats, they have none. The plural of aircraft is aircraft, not aircrafts. Just a few things that have been picked up. A little more research will go along way...
When a new model arrives, it always have bigger costs. Could the costs get more reasonable if the model was becoming standard?
Can anyone tell me what the “Winner of 2023” (3:45) means?
A380 is a passengers favorite. Unfortunately it is only economical to use on a few routes. At the end of the day airlines have to make a profit. The 787, A350 and 777 are what a majority of airlines find economical to operate. I know will get slated by the Airbus fanatics but Boeing read the market right and rejected the joint venture to develop a super jumbo. Boeing has made lots of mistakes since but they were right on this one.
The commenter forgot to mention that BA has A380 service from London to Dallas, TX. It draws such a crowd that the airport police have to rush out and keep people/photographers from the fence as the blast from the engines is pretty strong. I'm sure they can pick up a truck and throw it 50 feet without effort.
Love the 380.
I really was disappointed becz i didn't travelled in an A380 yet... And news regarding the A380 given a postive vibes
Not gonna talk about him pronouncing QANTAS kwant-ass?
There is no such word as "AIRCRAFTS"! Unless you are using the possessive case which you clearly are not. Aircraft is both singular and plural.
Thank you for your comment. This is such a common mistake that drives me crazy.
Don’t be such a pompous twat.
@@neilturner6749 I will be continue to be correct or pompous as an uneducated person might call it. As for being a '' twat '' I am lead to believe that this word has some meaning in a minority dialect know as british english. I don't concern myself with the usage of uninteresting backwaters.
Another pro airbus channel !
An airworthiness directive for wing spar cracks was released on 11 May, which will delay return to service of the A380. The cracks are related to hydrogen embrittlement resulting from longterm storage in desert environments.
Great aircraft I helped build ❤
I wonder whether it would make any economic sense to re-engine existing A380's with new RR Ultrafan once this engine is available.
Installing new, more efficient, engines on existing, aging airframes is common practise in the military fleets : KC-135, C-5, B-52, are some exemples.
It is much less usual in the civilian domain, strangely.
My guess is that this is because of the sorter lifetime of the airframes (more glight hours per years) and more difficult certification.
The only large-scale exemple I know of is the DC-8 : scores of DC-8's were re-engined with CFM56.
The problem also is that the A380 always cost more to produce than it sold for.
when the A380 was designed most airlines were flying with small aircraft from lokal airports to Hubs and from hub to hub with large aircraft , but with the extendet range version of smaller aircraft more airliner went with small aircraft betwin smaller airports avoiding the large costst of the hubs and have a point to point flight , that killed the verry large aircraft like the 747 and 380 of , and the largest desireble plane was the 777 , and now the 787 and A350
was I the only one to notice the A350-500 😂. last time I checked that wasn’t a plane
If aviation can someday transition to a different type of fuel. And if that one is way way cheaper. The A380 can rise up again.
Not happening unless they become 2 engined aircraft.
@@jayvee8502 Engine for 2x engine version shall have at least 700kN of thrust. There is no such engine for now. Also one 700+kN will have greatee diameter than current RR Trent 970 turbofan. This would require another type of fuselage that has top mount of wing to fuselage like in Antonov An-225. This is completely different aircraft that has nothing to do with A380.
@@alexanderbelov6892 That's the problem. The design itself was intended to be a 4 engine aircraft. Converting it to an 2 engine aircraft is not possible even if there is an engine powerful enough to power a A380 with just a pair. In today's econmics airliners with 4 engines are less efficient to operate.
@@jayvee8502
Probably A380 is too big to have only 2 engines.
Probably CFM's new engine "Rise" will resurrect this giant. CFM used A380 to test the new open rotor engine. They might have a plan to power A380s with the new super efficient engines
I believe most airlines these days that are in the market for widebody a/c might find better use with the A350 if the airline is not smitten with the Boeing option. Again I do NOT see many airlines making the 380 have a comeback.
he word comfortability does not technically exist in the English lexicon. The word most closely resembling comfortability is comfort.
English is old language.
I cringed at the use of this 'word'. As made up as some of the comments in the video.
Come on, English is clearly not the narrators first language so give him a break, we all know what he meant.
@@neilturner6749 Is that the case? The narrator's first language is not English? If so then as someone doing this on what is effectively a professional basis (the channel generates income) he should be looking for critical review of his performance as it comes over too often as pompous and verbose. Additionally some of the content is doubtful. All of that has certainly turned me off watching.
How dare you say “Kan-taas” instead of “Qu-on-tus”
Edit: Also called my home city “Mehl-born”
Recently, I was on a ride on a Lufthansa 747-8 in Economy. It was uncomfy, comparing to the A380 from AirFrance, B787 and B777 from SWISS
The A350 doesn’t have a 500 variant. What are you talking about here 9:31 ?
If only airbus didn't STOP PRODUCTION OF THE A380 I HAVE NEVER SEEN AN A380 IN MY LIFE AND I PROBABLY NEVER WILL.
Which airline switched to 747?
00:40 - Literally using a picture of the last KLM 747 that was permanently retired for commercial passenger flight when it flew flight KL896 on 25-10-2020.
What an uninformative fluff piece. I am glad that it was, at least, cheerfully delivered, though it all fits in once sentence: "We like A-380 because big is cool." I agree. It is fun and spacious to fly on. Every airline? Ahem, no. No American carrier has any desire or use for the super-jumbo. Heavily-Traveled routes are this machine's specialty because it cannot be flown profitably, without very high load factors that, unfortunately are temperamental and seasonal, why Emirates also has a fleet of 777 aircraft. Emirates does well with the A-380 because the geography uniquely supports some heavily traveled hub and spoke routes. Parking and Storing the huge airplane, for everyone else half the year, is a huge expense, which is why of those who own them, most prefer to err on the side of having just enough or slightly less of aircraft in service. Emirates would like to buy some A-380 Neos. For Tim Clark "Neo" means same, BUT burns less fuel, which translates into a more efficient engine, unfortunately, that does not exist. None of our engine-makers are interested in his "neo" program, because there were only 252 airplanes built, a closed, small market for an engine that would not suit any other airplane. Engine-makers are likewise not interested in a 757 re-engine program, even though over 1000 airplanes were built. What we see is two awkward spots in the market, the middle (757 and 767-200 passenger capacity) and very high capacity, over 400, and NOT with four engines.
With the 747s retiring it would be great for the A380s to make a comeback.
The seats on the Asiana a380 were the most uncomfortable seats I've ever sat in on an airliner. I flew a 13.5 hr flight and my butt started hurting 1 hr into the flight.
That’s the airlines problem
An A380 can carry over 800 passengers if the seat space is the same as a standard 747. An A380 with seating for 500 passengers allows much more space per passenger.
The best aircraft . I have ever flown..
With airports wanting to ban four engine aircrafts I don't see this happening unless Airbus somehow are able to convert them with GE90s for a twin engine. This would be an enormous task. Not only is it a very difficult design change, but it would need new flight worthiness licences as well.
Hey if Boeing can continue to fit ever larger diameter engines on to its old dinosaur 737 body, I'm sure Airbus can manage the switch from 2 to 4 engines 🙂
@@bobdobalina838 or to two engines :) But I wonder if it isn't better to release a new aircraft instead. Newer technology and since it needs new licensing anyway it might not be worth it to keep the A380 alive. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Every airline would NOT need an A380. The 380 was a great idea at the very wrong time in airline history. Airbus wanted to outdo the 747 and well, we saw the end result.
380 for ever
British Airways forward thinking?.... what?!
Just my opinion but airbus shot themselves in the foot not making a cargo variant. Passenger jumbos were already on the way out when they introduced the 380 but they built it anyway. No big surprise they're already being scrapped.
But the shot in the foot happened at design time - they went for a "double bubble" pressure vessel in the fuselage and a lower set cockpit which both make cargo conversion impossible. Unlike the 747 which was designed as a freighter first capable of passenger conversion, not the other way around.
What's not to LOVE about the gaint, staircase, bar, shower, toilets, first class bedding, boy o boy stay ahead.
Which airlines go for the 747? Only 3 airlines operate the 747 nowadays.
covid is receding, people is travelling , demand for flight increase, A380 is making a come back - thats the overall picture.
Dragging them out of the Arizona desert after years sitting in the sand. A brand new 380 will never be built, BOOK IT.
Funniest video i've seen in weeks.
The AI program you used to make this video is short on the "I".
aircrafts? comftorbility? the orders seem to cease? slipping demand was more of a financial cause? kantas? where the a380 is notorious?
for some reason the demand for air travel naturally decreased? several international travelers? the horde of orders?
when demand picks up at the end of 2020 and the winter of 2023? etc, etc, etc...
Also, the a380 didn't fail because of ticket prices, it failed because people didn't want to fly to 'hubs' and then take connecting flights to their destination.
In addition, airlines are only bringing them back because they discovered they can't sell them, so they need to make something from them instead of letting them sit around and rot.
If I were an airline exec I would tailor the aircraft to be ultra luxury. Target the ultra high net worth individuals who would otherwise fly in a private jet. I'm talking multi person suites, full internet connectivity, bathrooms, lounges etc. Make the entire plane catered to high end users and run them on high capacity routes like Dubai - London, or Paris - New York, Singapore - Dubai, any route where lots of ultra rich people will travel. Then you can charge whatever you like for the experience safe in the knowledge that people with that much money will pay whatever the price to fly in that level of comfort. Also it would mean Holywood A listers will fly commercial jet instead of private without having to rub shoulders with the great unwashed. Meaning bonus "Sustainability" points. You could even make it chartered, flying in celebs for events like Wimbledon, or Indy500 or whatever.
Bro … this video makes no sense Melbourne/Sydney to LA is a route where it makes the most sense to remove an a380, it’s got competition from virgin, UA, American and delta. It is also 15 hrs so a more efficient aircraft makes a lot of sense and most travellers are going business or economy. Also UA, American both operate 787 on that route and delta and virgin 777 so makes total sense … also Lufthansa is not a direct competitor to “kantas”
Im so happy the best aircraft ever is not dead yet :D
I hope it's come back for good this time
Bro did not just say “can-tas” instead of “quan-tas”
Just one niggle, but the plural should be “A380s”, not “A380’s”. The latter would represent a possession form or an omitted letter.
This seems a very confused story. Airlines want the A380 because of its efficiencies in operation, then countered with airlines wanting to switch to twin engine equipment, then that they’re preferring the 747 … and so it goes on. If we exclude freight operators, the 747 is now an unusual sight. And of course the switch to twin engine was due to greater adaptability with lower PAX numbers … it take a lot of people to fill an A380 … but they are now back. Not so sure of the space as he airlines still pack you in, but the reduced noised levels are nice and the ‘nasty hiss’ of the 777 is gone
"Comfortability"? Who thought up that word?
The same person who pronounces Qantas as "Kantass" and Melbourne as "Mell-born".
That shot of the Thames River in London was gross, i read not so long ago that a lot of raw sewerage goes into that river because ghe sewerage system was originally built for 2.5 million people and now there are 12 million people living there.
Untrue. The river is cleaner now than it has been since early Victorian times. London has an advanced and sophisticated wastewater transport and treatment system, continually being updated.
@@frglee 68000 hours of raw sweage overflow into the Thames area reported in 2021, over 2 billion litres in two days in October 2020. Very sophisticated.
@@davidperry7128 the government is working on it but progress has often been slow
The Thames is just that color - always has been - the whole of south east England is a big clay bed.
Swooosh! Swooosh! Swooosh!
What possessed your video editor to insist on a rushing arrow sound to accompany each screen transition? The effect is distracting, particularly as the somewhat choppy, meandering narative unwinds.
If engine technology has enabled a two engine version, it could work. The engines are a solid $10m each.
RR is developing an absolutely massive Ultrafan, supposedly for the military strategic airlifter market. Its so big they've had to build a new extra-large development and test facilty for it. But a lot of people think that it is actually for a clean-sheet twin engine A380 replacement Airbus is supposed to have its skunk works working on. Both companies are playing their cards very close to their chest though, so no-one knows.
I want fly in the A380 please don't phase out the iconic giant.
Airbus might install the new LEAP engines derived from the legendary CFM 56 (reached a billion flight hours this year) ,made much less fuel hungry & polluting and cheaper to build to airlines who wish to 're-use' their A380 airplanes for shorter flights ,not just ultra long hauls..
How is that even relevant?
for emirates the 777 for connecting flights the 777 is used for the last flight bc not all passengers will fly to Dubai for connection some will stay so less passengers for the last flight in the connection
The A380 is the most beautiful plane ever build but Boeing change the market but companies will cry for A380 in the future is just a bold project that Airbus needs to do again in something never seen in the sky
Airlines need the same number of pilots for an A380 as they need for a 737, and they have an increasingly limited number of pilots. The Dreamliner is more fuel efficient but the A380 is more labor efficient.
The A380 has always been a superlative aircraft. It will continue for d3cades to come. I'm only half way through, having to leave the stream, sadly, now. So, if I mention something actually covered past the 50% elapsed time mark, my apologies.
First, the 747's cessation of production must have something to do with the A380's 'rediscovery'. Second, 'cuz I'm not clar on this: has Airbus restarted production (he said, knowing full well how difficult and expensive that would be? Third, the 747 notwithstamding, the airline flying passenger does NOT like radical change.....or even MILD change. Concorde fits the bill on that story as a systemic example. I'll leave out the question of competitive cost. Bottom line: you can make more money flying diminished fleet numbers (more bums, more seats, less aircraft by putting the A3i0's on a high-numbers route. Your example of London to LA is spot on. Last (Thank Gawd), Airbus has done a damn fine job over this now quarter-century long process to sell the A380 as the safest passenger aircraft in the skies. Not one crash or catastrophic accident in the entire plwne's career. The safest airplane in the skies.
How, just wait until SpaceX incorporates as an airline, and begins to offer regularly scheduled suborbital major passenger route! I'm a good socialist, but the societal impact of the advent of THAT market will be fun to watch.