A380
- Thread starter xoxo
- Start date
- Banned
- #2
Are you serious?
US has no need for a plane that can hold 474-800 passengers.
No airport that US has as a hub can even accommodate the plane.
It is an absurd question.
The A350 is dead, and it is a twin engine airplane, the A380 is four engines and US has no use for it at all.
And if you check not one United States based Airline who flies passengers has ordered an A380.
US has no need for a plane that can hold 474-800 passengers.
No airport that US has as a hub can even accommodate the plane.
It is an absurd question.
The A350 is dead, and it is a twin engine airplane, the A380 is four engines and US has no use for it at all.
And if you check not one United States based Airline who flies passengers has ordered an A380.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #3
It was not an absurd question..it was just a curious question that did not need such a dumb comment from you. All you needed to say was..."No airport that US has as a hub can even accomdate the plane." PERIOD!!
Are you nuts?....seriously?
The only airport LCC flies to right now that can even handle the A380 is FRA....maybe possibly LAX and SFO. Where would we even fly the darn thing with 500+ passengers. Actually we could probably fill it with commuters between PIT and PHL. I don't even think this question deserves serious debate.
The only airport LCC flies to right now that can even handle the A380 is FRA....maybe possibly LAX and SFO. Where would we even fly the darn thing with 500+ passengers. Actually we could probably fill it with commuters between PIT and PHL. I don't even think this question deserves serious debate.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #6
You sound like my nephew who is 10....WHAAAWHAAAA...I can say what I wahaaant...grow up.
usairways85
Senior
- May 18, 2003
- 262
- 0
Well maybe before starting this thread you should have given it some thought yourself. If you are a person that follows US commericial aviation even just a little it really wouldn't take much to realize why US would never order the A380.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #8
I am a f/a and I dont fly the plane nor know about the length of the runways in all of the world to know how many airports U can take it. I dont study a subject before starting a thread. Good lord..it was a simple question. Why does it have to be so darn technical of an answer? Noone has to be so rude when someone is just asking a question and make them feel like they are stupid or something for asking.
Ease up XO. Virtually everyone in the aviation industry knows the A380 is the largest commercial aircraft built. There are very few markets in the world right now that can even support such an aircraft. And LCC doesn't fly in any of them. Thats why most people in the industry are scratching their heads right now as to why Airbus is even taking such a risk with this aircraft.
Let's rephrase your question and maybe you will get some serious discussion: Will LCC in 10-15 years or ever for that matter be in the market for an aircraft like the 747-8 or maybe even the A380?
My answer is no. But I do think we'll be in the market very very soon for an aircraft with extended range in the 250 seat size.
Let's rephrase your question and maybe you will get some serious discussion: Will LCC in 10-15 years or ever for that matter be in the market for an aircraft like the 747-8 or maybe even the A380?
My answer is no. But I do think we'll be in the market very very soon for an aircraft with extended range in the 250 seat size.
Runways would need to be lengthened and widened, as well, because the wing span of the 380 hangs over most runways.
Also, ground service equipment, such as catering trucks, and lav trucks, etc., do not exist that can handle the a/c. They are testing "prototypes".
Not to mention, where to park it at the terminal, Alleyways and ramp parking/gate areas would need to be redesigned.
Its really crazy-huge, and I think its bigger than we need.
Imagine all the new training, manuals, paperwork involved?
Not just for crews, but MX as well?
And airport agents?
WAAYY too expensive for us.
Also, ground service equipment, such as catering trucks, and lav trucks, etc., do not exist that can handle the a/c. They are testing "prototypes".
Not to mention, where to park it at the terminal, Alleyways and ramp parking/gate areas would need to be redesigned.
Its really crazy-huge, and I think its bigger than we need.
Imagine all the new training, manuals, paperwork involved?
Not just for crews, but MX as well?
And airport agents?
WAAYY too expensive for us.
USCREW
Veteran
This plane requires at least two separate jetways and it will take two hours to fully load. Read that somewhere.
- Banned
- #12
Are you looking in the mirror?
USAir won't order the SkyPig A380 - think about it: the only airlines that need such a big airplane should already be flying big airplanes like 747s. In fact, nearly every passenger airline that has ordered the A380 already has a fleet of 747s. USAir buying this airplane makes as much sense as a two or three person household trading up from a Ford Escort to a Ford Excursion.
The OP apparently wants to see yet another bankruptcy at USAir - anybody remember what happened at HP not too long after it started flying 747s??
The OP apparently wants to see yet another bankruptcy at USAir - anybody remember what happened at HP not too long after it started flying 747s??
Mr Eagle
Senior
May 18: Watch the superjumbo Airbus A380 land at London's Heathrow airport for the first time. The airport is spending $850 million on upgrades to handle the double-decker jet, which is expected to enter commercial service this year.
This is A very Good Reason the US Major Airline Industry is not Entertaining the A380 Idea's. @ $850 million dollar to up grade your Airport that is Very Expensive & not apart of the Fed's Airport upgrade Act.
It Was A good Post Don't Let other Moron's Dicourage you From Asking ?'s They Them Self's are Afraid to ask. MWW
SoftLanding
Senior
- Jul 25, 2005
- 255
- 1
About the only route we could fly it would be PHL-FRA. So one aircraft, now that would not be cost effective, I believe
Then again, maybe the pilots would take another cut... As for infrastructure...runways, taxiways, gates, that's another thread alltogether...
Star Alliance member Lufthansa routes to the East Coast and Asia would have the density, hence the 15 orders.
The city pairs US Airways flies obviously does not have the traffic, since we don't have the connection traffic in London, Paris, Rome etc. Though the US Airways pilots could end up flying a segment from the US East Coast to South America, or across the Pacific. (UAL would most likely have a say in that also).
SoftLanding
