Regarding the last two sentences in the quote above, I have to agree that appearance-wise, the A380 isn't as aesthetically "engaging" as the 74, but definitely represents some darn good engineering.
Which is what it is all about -- airframers don't deliberately set out to design a wizzy looking aircraft, they design to meet certain goals, and that sometimes results in something iconic.
Rottenray
I like the phrase "..isn't as aesthetically engaging...". That could be uttered by any member of the FCO (Foreign & Colonial Office), yet I note you are from Denver?
Don't misunderstand, the A380 undoubtedly represents engineering of the very highest order, but everything in it is pretty much Airbus writ large. There isn't much we didn't already know about.
The 747 was a whole new concept. Everything about her was not only writ large, but pretty much different. Sure the 707 had four engines and swept, supercritical wings, but the way all that was hung together was so different. The materials, the engines (Oh Lord, the engines!), the shape and the cost were all unknown territory. Remember, Boeing almost 'bought the farm' with the 747.
The whole civilised world ought to be grateful they didn't. Long live the Queen.
Landroger