Wiz- Firstly, let me say, I apologise if you think I am offended by contrarian opinions. I am not. Because I differ in opinion to you does not, in any way shape or form say that I am offended. Methinks you are a being a tad precious here.
What you are saying, in argument, is that because it has four engines and is big, it was doomed to fail. I disagree.
If you need to get 615+ people to a destination in one go, you can't do it with a twin. If the technology was there to do it, then the 380 would have been a twin.
No doubt Airbus took a risk. Thats what innovation is all about. When Boeing first came up with the 747, the same arguments were made re no one would ever buy it as it was too big. Also, after the airlines committed to the 747, the economic down turn at the time, also meant that after the 747 was ready, airlines cancelled in droves and Boeing nearly went bankrupt.
There are two cases to look at here.
1. Is the aircraft profitable for an Airline like Emirates?
2. Is the aircraft profitable for Airbus.
I would say the answer to 1, appears, to be yes, after all, with so many 380s that EK has, over the years, and still produced a profit, I would say that it is a good fit.
I would say the answer to 2 is - Well, more grey. Clearly Airbus saw a greater demand marketing wise for the case to deliver the very large aircraft.
Feel free, to discuss. I am happy for it.
