Jet II

As SLF who spends most of his time down the back the A380 is by far the most comfortable economy cabin and was always my preferred option; then A350, then B787, least preferred is B777, unless I can find one of the few remaining airlines with decent service and 9-across seating. Haven't flown a B747 for so many years I honestly thought that they had all already been retired - especially when the last one I was on felt like it needed to be retired 5 years earlier (although still preferable to a B777)!

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....b70805da50.jpg

It has not totally disappeared from the skies, saw this one flying over Munich a month ago. There have been a lot of negative
comments in this thread. I am not a great Airbus admirer, and never managed to travel on a A 380, but have seen a flight
display after a name giving ceremony, and could not believe my eyes when I saw how agile this aircraft was. It was not built
for a beauty contest, but at the time it was introduced, it was a money maker on the routes it was built for. A very good example
was the Singapore-London sector, where 747´s sometimes were lacking the range, and had to stop at Frankfurt for refuelling.
It could also carry the load of two smaller size aircraft which was a great relief on this particular route. Never ever did I hear a
passenger making bad comments about this aircraft, everybody loved to fly on it. Emirates owes much of its success to the
A 380. Given the present conditions and restrictions, it probably guarantees services to some key destinations for a while. I
remember a top manager at British Airways saying that if it was up to him, the airline would only operate B 787 and A 380 air-
craft. The 787 for the thinner routes, the A 380 for high density routes. No one could know that there would be circumstances
like we have them today. And I fear we will have them for a long time.

I wonder when engine technology would have delivered so that a twin 380 would have been feasible.

Wonder if they say the same about the investments they had to make when the 747 was introduced? They invested because they thought they had read the market. No one knows where the airline market is headed at the moment, but pre Covid I was still of the belief, right or wrong, that with the then forecast growth that very large aircraft would have a place as the airspace became saturated. An airport can only handle a fixed number of movements per hour.

I've had a bit of experience operating that route over the last three decades and our 744s certainly were not in the habit of having to make fuel stops en-route because they couldn't "make" London.

On a bad day with perhaps a temporary fuel system limitation or a day when the whole of north western Europe had very poor weather (meaning a high required reserve fuel figure on arrival in the London TMA) then maybe it happened but it certainly was not a feature of "normal" SIN-LHR 744 ops where I worked.

It was also interesting to operate the 777 on that same route and compare the fuel/payload the 777 (especially the -300) needed vs. the fuel/payload our colleagues on the 380 on the same route were carrying...if you could see those numbers you'd probably understand why the accountants like the "big twins", but I accept for many the 380 provided the superior passenger experience.

From a piloting perspective it is a magnificent aeroplane to fly:ok: As a passenger it is the most comfortable ride in the sky...

The last one may be off the production line but it's not finished in the skies above us...

Jet II

Yes, you have those items on the 777, but with a lot of noise! The 380 evolution was the passenger comfort - after all they pay for - and the evolution keeps going on with the 350, unfortunately not with the 787.

Don't be so sure! The future is always full of surprises....

.

The A380 even had firm orders for the factory built freighter version.
Any conversion would be the perfect amazon package-carrier.

Amen.

The 777 was ghastly in terms of cabin noise. The A380 was absolutely wonderful, i've flown on it a few times in Business and Economy, hands down the best aircraft i've flown in yet. I've not been in a 787 or A350 yet however.

A few years ago when Air France introduced the A380 they operated a number of flights to London and myself and some friends booked a flight to get a ride on one. I had flown on one before so knew what to expect but for my friends it was their first time. As we took off one friend said to me "is that it" refering to the noise or rather lack of and it is that that sums up why passengers like it so much. The A350 comes very close though.

People can "like" the aircraft in bucket loads, but you need to follow the money and not the sentiment.

Bidule

Must be me, I see a lot of people enthusing over the comfort in an A380 but it was something that never struck me as head and shoulders above the competition. Yes it was a bit quieter but when you are watching a movie wearing noise cancelling headphones it was just the same - and you still need noise cancelling headphones on the 380.

Also at lot of passenger comfort is down to how the individual airline configures their cabin. I only flew on the 380 once in Economy and it was easily one of the most uncomfortable flights I have had - but I suspect that was down to it being BA rather than anything to do with the aircraft.

I’ll take Zone A on a 747 over the A380 anyday!

Jet II

I have flown on the 380 six times - twice in economy & four times in business - by far & away the most comfortable a/c I have ever flown in (especially in economy). I can only say that I am very sorry that Airbus could not sell many more of them; & that their time is nearly up. We are going backwards ( have not flown the A350) as far as the passenger is concerned.

The first time I flew as pax on the A380 was so good that going back to the B777 made it look like a pauper pack, even on the better fresher kitted ones.

The A380 is also unexpectedly very manoeuvrable for its size. I watched a QF A380 perform a semi-aerobatic manoeuvre at the Australian GP and thought its wings would fall off.

Finally, the A380 wing is out of proportion with the rest of the fuselage as stretched versions were planned. The anticipated winning formula with the A380 was that it was meant to alleviate peak slot demand at major airports by carrying two plane loads (airplane loads !?) in the one slot. Then the bottom fell out of international air travel.

Pax love the A380, and many pax including myself are willing to play a premium for the comfort to fly on this beast of a plane (airplane !?).

Only flown A380 twice (LHR-LAX-LHR). Apart from noise levels v. 744/777, the Club cabin was "same old BA" ... but with smaller side bins that popped open uncommanded!

Colour me apathetic from a pax POV.

The ride on the 380 is nice and quiet, agreed. The shower and the bar are quite fancy, agreed again.

Now let's put 4" of more insulation into the walls with a shower and a bar into a T7, or a Tupolev for that matter, and we'd have the same fan base lauding these airplanes (!) and the airlines pulling them off line later because the economy went down the drain .......
In physics you simply can't have it both ways - more comfort through more weight and more economy just don't go together. Even for Timmys and Ahmeds.
(by the way: that was what i said from day one. Not that the 380 was a bad airplane, but an unsustainable one for unsubsidized business)

The fan base wishing the 380 to return after the crisis can eventually make their wish come true, if they'd be ready to pay the effective price for its comfort, but that simply ain't gonna happen. Neither the earlier, nor the latter!

wiggy

Hmmm. So, August 89... And for many years thereafter, the 744 would be an interesting night out getting the "plane" through the hoops to LHR. There was a 44 that went dark on the ramp post landing holding Goff for a bay, of course that could happen for a little while.. There were others that got headlines. Overall, was much nicer than the classic on the gas, but SIN LHR could be a fun night out for all. SCANDINAVIAN 972 going 78 along the mid levels on 2 blenders just added so much tactical fun. The marketing peepelz that thubked that it was a great idea to run a gaggle of "planes" mixing up overhead Calcutta from multiple Airways, and then fighting for altitude against a low level jet stream at least helped while away the time.

Personally while. Having enjoyed almost all the time in the 1-400's and short stuffs, the 380 wing is exceptional.. The flaps without thrust gates are remarkable, and Airbus got supercrit basics right, that LE radius gives minimal pain. The cockpit is exceptional, prefer the cueing from the 777 and 787, prefer AI's FCS logic +C rather than Boeing. When things go awry, I liked the 777 and 787. As a passenger in any class up to and including steerage, give me the 380. In 20 years, we will remember both fondly. As far as aesthetics go, after a while you either got numb or used to it. Just like the ride difference between the 380 and everything else.. It was a spectacular gamble, and sometimes you win, other times you get a face plant in the poop.

The industry is a shambles for the near future, so it will be a boon for Haj.. In a few years, and for chicken coops

Spot on. The return leg of the LHR-YVR A380 trip I mentioned upthread was on a 777, and the difference was like night and day. There's been a couple of snarky comments about fans of the A380 paying a premium for flying on it if they want to see it succeed; you'll find that there are people who have done that - though, admittedly, unlikely enough people to see it have much of a longer life.