@Jack
Honestly, every post regarding the A380 sees a onslaught of handbags at dawn from the haters.
Every post? You sound like Baghdad Bob (M.S.S.) at his best:
"I have detailed information about the situation...which completely proves that what they allege are illusions . . . They lie every day."
I personally don't know any 380 driver who dislikes the aircraft.
Irrelevant, isn’t it? Pilots loved the Concorde and still ….
I am told that most passengers and Boeing pilots prefer to travel on the A380.
Most prefer to get to the destination they want, at a time they want. There are not many destinations to chose between the two aircraft. Thus irrelevant.
The space, layout and sound level are superior on the dugong, I have always admitted that. But I always added that you can thickly insulate, fit with bar and shower even a Tupolev. Only problem is, it will get heavier and less economic. If the company then still charges the same price, big deal, anyone will prefer the upgraded product. But it has to look green below the beancounter’s line and the boneyard north tells another story.
I'm told that if Commercial can "fill" the aircraft then it's a good money maker over 7hrs (…) IF tickets are priced right and the 380 is filled then it's very profitable, blame commercial, not the aircraft for losses.
Big deal again! The statement is true for any commercial aircraft, isn’t it? It’s when you can no longer price to your liking (or need) or you can no longer completely fill an aircraft, when it shows its commercial capabilities. Airframe is a decision by managers, agreed, but I have since the beginning predicted that the dugong has its very weakness there, due to its layout with 4 donkeys and 4 trunks. It works on certain routes and does not on too many others. The boneyard tells a story again, face it!
Summary, it is once again jealous Boeing pilots whose light twin attitude is brought here to try to give the "mine is better than yours" argument.
Well, no. I rejected the opportunity to fly the dugong and don’t regret it. Furthermore a “light twin” is effectively a compliment, compared to a “overweight quad”. It is not so much the puerile “mine is better” argument, it is the “mine is better suited” one, if any! The boneyard and Darwin both tell a story.
As for the eternal argument saying that you should not care what can you fly, you’re paid the same. Well, for that matter no one should then raise any issue about the perverted sponsoring of the company, or the bloated HQ staff, or Emiratisation or AAR or anything else in conjunction with the absence of a pay rise or profit share. Because unsuited material chosen by management falls into the same category and is just as open to criticism. But funnily enough a lot of the dugong defenders are fervent critics of the above. It’s inconsistent. As long as I have a good look on the boneyard north, I will criticise the dugong and somewhat pity those who look away.