It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Even with some of the 747s being replaced by the 380, you're still talking about more passengers coming in if they're even a little over half full.
Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Looks like there are more troubles with the A380 than are being let out!
For those of you who aren't passingly familiar with what this is all about .... someone was trying to turn Airbus' great big, brand-new, A380 aircraft a little too sharply (we don't know whether under it's own power, or while it was under tow).
As new-aircraft design problems go, this will likely prove to be a very expensive one for Airbus to deal with. It's either that, or the aircraft will only be able to operate in and out of airports that have the extra fifty-acres it will need to get safely turned-around. It'll be interesting to see how they solve this one.
Airbus elected NOT to make their main landing gear system (four separate gear with four wheels apiece) steerable. Why? You save a considerable amount of weight -- not to mention some serious extra cost -- by not doing so. There is a trade-off, however ...
Originally posted by waynos
Also, the point about Airports not coping because there are already too many 747's coming in and adding a couple of A380'S is unthinkable (I paraphrase, I know) misses the point that if all those 747's were actually replaced by A380's then the airport in question would have 1/3 to a 1/2 as many actual landings to deal with
China plans to sign a deal next month confirming five airlines' orders for 50 Boeing 787 Dreamliners, a Chinese news agency said Friday. The Boeing Co. said it was still negotiating with those carriers and a sixth airline to seal commitments for a total of 60 orders placed in January.
Originally posted by RichardPrice
It still actually amazes me the amount of people who are dead set on thinking that the 747 is the biggest an aircraft should ever be. If an airport cant handle the passenger numbers brought in by an A380, then sorry but theres something seriously wrong with that airport. For the past 55 years, passenger numbers has done nothing but increase massively each year,
Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Qwazzy says:
True, it's easier to have all your parts come from countries "next door", but Boeing is probably building parts for planes in Japan JUST BECAUSE IT"S CHEAPER, thus having to lay-off a thousand people.
Japan has a higher standard of living than the US does; why else does a Japanese-made car cost so much?
Originally posted by RichardPrice
Theres no reason why an airport shouldnt increase the level of service provided for larger aircraft.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
I live on an island that is 144 miles around. We're already packed in here like sardines, and we have one of the bigger airports in the US. Where exactly do you expect us to expand? We've got a big business district right across the street on one side, ocean on two sides, and a USAF base on the other. We CAN'T expand anymore. If we remove our fuel tank farm we can get rid of the maintenance area, and add at the most 6 more gates.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
We'd either have to move the entire business area, then expand, or do like Kansai and build an offshore airport.