Nearly completed A380 rolls out

Apologies to anyone who doesnt want to see this, but I know there are a number of people on this forum who are interested.

Fantastic aircraft that she is, heres serial number 0001 being rolled out complete with all 4 engines and a new paintjob. Its going to be a beautiful site when she flies for the first time. Oh, and the covered areas on the fuselage and tail are the Airbus livery.




Full selection of A380 picks (and lots more commercial and military aircraft) at airliners.net, a site I recommend fully.

[edit on 8/1/2005 by RichardPrice]

Richard, the pic is not displaying.

On an off topic note: care to comment on the charges that Airbus is selling planes at below cost to the Asian market?

Edit: I don't like Airbus, but they do make great planes.

[edit on 1/8/05 by FredT]

Originally posted by FredT
Richard, the pic is not displaying.

On an off topic note: care to comment on the charges that Airbus is selling planes at below cost to the Asian market?

Edit: I don't like Airbus, but they do make great planes.

[edit on 1/8/05 by FredT]

Interesting, its displaying here :/

Heres a link to the page incase the image isnt displaying for you.

FredT, Airbus may be selling aircraft to the Asian market at below cost, but during the past 10 years both major manufacturers have done the same (meaning Airbus and Boeing) in all major markets (ask Easyjet how much their 737s cost, it was up to 90% off list price from Boeing. Sorry, I dont have a link for you on that as we speak, it was in print media a year or so back, I shall try and dig up a link tho). Its nothing special to sell anything below cost, its when its drastically below cost (eg selling for 1% of the cost price) that its considered 'dumping' and thus illegal.

From what Ive heard, the planes Airbus are selling below cost are aircraft that were cancelled by US and European airlines after 9/11, when they could no longer afford them. You will probably find Boeing is doing the same in the same market.

And for the record, I do like Boeing aircraft, especially the 737







[edit on 8/1/2005 by RichardPrice]

[edit on 8/1/2005 by RichardPrice]

Guys, does this baby have a window in the john ? Took a 350 (?) once last year and the view from the throne room was great. Nice large window !!

Originally posted by dixon
Guys, does this baby have a window in the john ? Took a 350 (?) once last year and the view from the throne room was great. Nice large window !!

You probably mean either the A340 (4 engine longhaul) or the A330 (2 engine mediumhaul) aircraft if they were twin aisled. The A350 doesnt exist as of yet. As for your question, I have no idea, but imagine taking a cr*p while looking out at 35,000 feet

It looks nice.
It's not as big as I imagined it to be.

EDIT: That's odd.
The picture is displaying now.
Perhaps it's in my cache after visiting the site myself.


[edit on 8-1-2005 by AceOfBase]

Sorry, it's got to be the 340 long haul then. It was beautiful. Big and beautiful and yes, I did look closely at the heavens when I went to the john. It was something else.

Originally posted by AceOfBase
It looks nice.
It's not as big as I imagined it to be.

EDIT: That's odd.
The picture is displaying now.
Perhaps it's in my cache after visiting the site myself.


[edit on 8-1-2005 by AceOfBase]

I changed the image link to a copy I placed on one of my own servers, thats why its displaying now. I think airliners.net blocks third party links for clients without preset cookies, but thenagain what I was doing was rather naughty

Remember that this is the initial A380-800 version, 550 seats in a standard 3 class configuration. There will be a longer A380-900 version for 650+ seats in the same config, or a shortened A380-700 version for 450 seats in the same config. Also the -800 can hold up to 850 seats in a single class configuration, with the -900 coming in at over a thousand seats.

Im impressed by the size of the engines themselves

I make some some hoses for that have any more pics,

Cheers for the pic Richard. Curious why you felt you had to begin with an apology though? The A380 is an aircraft project is it not?

PS, Fred, You don't have to tell me you don't like Airbus

Cool plane. It remains to be seen whether it will be competitive with the Boeing 747 though...

Originally posted by waynos
Cheers for the pic Richard.

Curious why you felt you had to begin with an apology though? The A380 is an aircraft project is it not?

PS, Fred, You don't have to tell me you don't like Airbus

The reason for the apology is that some people may feel that this type of thing doesnt fit the description of the Aircraft Projects forum, not being 'black' or 'controversial' enough

But she is a nice aircraft, and I have an invite to go see her first flight! For anyone interested, a friend and myself are goingo to Le Bourget Paris Airshow 2005, where the A380 will be doing flying demonstrations. June 19th - 21st is the public display days.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Cool plane. It remains to be seen whether it will be competitive with the Boeing 747 though...

Why wouldnt it?

A A380-800 carrying 550 passengers costs $270million.
A 747-400 carrying 436 passangers costs $215million.
Both work out at roughly $0.5million per passenger.
The Airbus requires the same length runway to takeoff and land, but it requires wider runways. Most airports can take the A380 currently, with only some having to expand runways or taxiways to fit.

The 747-400 has a range of 14,205km, with a max fuel capacity of 63,700gallons.
The A380-800 has a range of 15,100km, with a max fuel capacity of 81,900gallons.

That gives the 747-400 a rate of 0.2km/g.
And the A380 a rate of 0.18km/g.

Or, based on passenger numbers, the 747-400 has a rate of 1.02 gallons of fuel per 100km per passenger. The A380 has a rate of 0.9 gallons of fuel per 100km per passenger. (work all that out myself, phew). This gives the Airbus a more efficient fuel cost when carrying a full passenger load.

The A380 will be used mainly on the longhaul hub routes, such as LA to Hongkong, London to Hongkong, London to Sydney, London to New York, New York to Hongkong etc. You will see it on other routes tho, its just as good for those.

Make no mistake, in the longrun ALL international airports will be able to take the A380, as other airlines will want more routes, and that is what drives airports to expand.

[edit on 8/1/2005 by RichardPrice]

[edit on 8/1/2005 by RichardPrice]

Yeah, it will probably succeed in those high traffic long-haul flight paths you mentioned in the fully passenger configuration, but I think these videos being shown of configurations with bars, recreation rooms, libraries and bedroom suites etc. is more of a pipe dream than anything else.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Yeah, it will probably succeed in those high traffic long-haul flight paths you mentioned in the fully passenger configuration, but I think these videos being shown of configurations with bars, recreation rooms, libraries and bedroom suites etc. is more of a pipe dream than anything else.

I agree, those are more marketing dreams than anything else, but bear in mind pretty much every widebodied aircraft has had those same ideas marketed before as well.

On the other hand, Virgin includes a bar in the business/first class sections of its A340s and 747s as standard these days, it also includes bedroom suites on the 747, and the A380 has a lower section (below the lower deck - where the A340 has its toilets) which Virgin has said it might use for shops/lounges as well as toilets.

So, you never know! Depends how much you are willing to pay, I spose

The only problem is that travellers are demanding more and more direct flights and rejecting the hub-and-spoke system instituted by the large carriers in past years. It used to be you pretty much always had to go to one of only a few large cities in the U.S. to fly to London then connect to travel to the European continent, but now we can fly direct from many U.S. cities to cities in France, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Italy, etc., so planes like the 7E7 and 777 may be the wave of the future and the A380 may only be playing a belated catch-up to the 747.

[edit on 1/8/2005 by djohnsto77]

[edit on 1/8/2005 by djohnsto77]

Originally posted by djohnsto77
The only problem is that travellers are demanding more and more direct flights and rejecting the hub-and-spoke system instituted by the large carriers in past years. It used to be you pretty much always had to go to one of only a few large cities in the U.S. to fly to London then connect to travel to the European continent, but now we can fly direct from many U.S. cities in France, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Italy, etc., so planes like the 7E7 and 777 may be the wave of the future and the A380 may only be playing a belated catch-up to the 747.

[edit on 1/8/2005 by djohnsto77]

But many routes, like the ones I mentioned, are longhaul only and available only in the hub and spoke method I mentioned, precisely because the demand for direct travel isnt there yet. To fly from most airports in the continental US to most airports in Europe is pretty easy, because any class of aircraft from the 767ER (10,500km range carrying 245 passengers) upwards can make the trip, but to do the Hongkong, Japan, Australia, Singapore flights, you need a longhaul capable aircraft, which is the 747-400ER (13,500km carrying 420 passengers), 777ER (13,500km range carrying 365 passengers), the 7E7 (15,350Km carrying 250 passengers), and the A340 (15,750km carrying 313 passengers). The A340 is the one capable of more routes since it has the most range (15,750km), and thus sees the most routes. To make these class of aircraft available at any random airport in the world for routes which arent as popular as European routes is cost prohibitive for airlines, rather than fly selected numbers of them from selected hub airports.

The hub and spoke system isnt used anymore for regular flights, and it probably wont be used when the A380-800 matures because longer range aircraft such as those above will be the norm, but by the time that happens, airlines will have forced all international class airports to upgrade if needed to take the newer generation superheavies, whether they be the A380 or whatever comes out to compete with it. But make no mistake, the hub and spoke system is still alive and accepted in longhaul arenas.

I like the A-380, but its probably the only Airbus I like.

I used to think it was the 747 with the top deck finished, but awhile back I took some time to learn about it, and It is a all new plane and quit a bit bigger the the 747.

I think there is a place for both, the A-380 will do good, and so will the 7E7.

I agree, they both have their place in the market. I also seem to remember that I once jumped on you (figuratively speaking, lol) for saying that the A380 was just a 747 with the hump extended, so thumbs up for 'denying ignorance' there murcielago

As for looks, while I think the A380 is a mightiliy impressive plane I think that the A340 is absolutely beautiful. The best looking Boeing, in my eyes, is the super 737 but from the artist impressions so far I think the real 7E7 will run the A340 very close, if not beat it, in the beauty stakes when it appears 'in the metal' as it were.

If the final 7E7 looks anywhere near as cool as in this artist's conception, I think it'll win the commercial airline beauty contest hands down.



[edit on 1/9/2005 by djohnsto77]