Airbus A380 may be discontinued

[FordGT90Concept]

http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/11/news/companies/airbus-super-jumbo-a380/index.html?iid=HP_LN

Known for being the largest commercial aircraft on the market, it isn't selling well enough to continue production beyond 2018 if orders don't pick up. Boeing has gone all out designing aircraft that are as fuel efficient as possible and the A380 is not. Airbus may be forced to either discontinue it or invest more money into the platform improving efficiency in order to pull in more orders.

Sad.

 

[vega22]

fuck slow planes!!!!

we want faster ones!!!

concord 2 plox!!!

 

[FreedomEclipse]

concord 2 plox!!!

I dont think anyones gonna make another concord for a while yet.

 

[vega22]

not when they can cram us into tiny, slow ones which cost so little to run no....

 

[remixedcat]

fuck slow planes!!!!

we want faster ones!!!

concord 2 plox!!!

OMG Concorde FTW I was sad to see those go too!

 

[flmatter]

One the biggest problems facing it, is where it can land. there are only 6-7 airports in North America that can land it. The rest of its target customers are in Europe and Far East/India. I admire the swing at go big and carry more but why build a plane so big you force your target market to build bigger airports? I would like to see concorde 2 come out. Get there fast, screw being packed in like sardines.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

fuck slow planes!!!!

we want faster ones!!!

concord 2 plox!!!

A380 can hold 853 passengers at maximum. Concorde can only hold 128 at most. A Concorde would have to make 7 flights to carry the same amount of people and do it at substantially higher costs. Airbus was counting on there being demand for high capacity aircraft like the A380 but apparently demand isn't as great as they anticipated.

I dont think anyones gonna make another concord for a while yet.

Lockheed's N+2

One the biggest problems facing it, is where it can land. there are only 6-7 airports in North America that can land it. The rest of its target customers are in Europe and Far East/India. I admire the swing at go big and carry more but why build a plane so big you force your target market to build bigger airports? I would like to see concorde 2 come out. Get there fast, screw being packed in like sardines.

It's the terminal that needs to be upgraded in order to accommodate the double-deck. It was designed to physically be only slightly larger than the Boeing 747-800 which can land at virtually all international airports.

 

[remixedcat]

thing is Concorde are 6x faster

 

[MxPhenom 216]

pretty sure this was on the verge of happening a long time ago. Especially when landing gear malfunctioned when trying to land on one of its very first flights. Recall after recall.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

thing is Concorde are 6x faster

Concorde = 1,354 mph
Airbus A380 = 634 mph
Concorde is a little more than twice as fast. A380 undeniably can move more people in less time over any distance.

Reading the Lockheed N+1 article, they said the primary reason why Concorde was a bust is because it is illegal for a commercial aircraft to create a sonic boom over land. This effectively relegated the Concorde to flying between London and New York City. The N+1's sonic boom is 100 times quieter so they're hoping that it's quiet enough that the laws will change allowing commercial aircraft to go super sonic above land.

pretty sure this was on the verge of happening a long time ago. Especially when landing gear malfunctioned when trying to land on one of its very first flights. Recall after recall.

Landing gear malfunctioning is more common than it should be across all airframes but rarely catastrophic. Recalls are common for all types of commercial aircraft because they are expected to be proactive in order to prevent accidents from happening in the first place.

I think @flmatter hit the nail on the head. When there's so few terminals that can support the double decker A380 that limits where they can operate. Airbus is on track to saturate those terminals so there likely won't be more A380 orders put in unless more terminals are upgraded to accommodate it.

 

[remixedcat]

damn yuppies ruin EVERYTHING!!!

 

[Menzenski]

Just going to leave this here: http://www.ausbt.com.au/airbus-confirms-a380neo-and-a380-stretch

Very much up in the air (lol) right now, but four-engined planes seem to be going the way of the dodo.

 

[vega22]

Reading the Lockheed N+1 article, they said the primary reason why Concorde was a bust is because it is illegal for a commercial aircraft to create a sonic boom over land. This effectively relegated the Concorde to flying between London and New York City. The N+1's sonic boom is 100 times quieter so they're hoping that it's quiet enough that the laws will change allowing commercial aircraft to go super sonic above land.

that was not a law before boring failed to make their supersonic jet work. once they failed to make the mk3 jet they said they would they turned a cargo plane into the 747 instead....

then funded the lobbyists and protesters :/

lockheed already have your government bought and paid for so i do not doubt they can get that law removed today.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Just going to leave this here: http://www.ausbt.com.au/airbus-confirms-a380neo-and-a380-stretch

Very much up in the air (lol) right now, but four-engined planes seem to be going the way of the dodo.

The reason why they have 4 engines is because the diameter is limited by the distance between the wings and the ground afforded by the undercarriage. Larger engines are more efficient and they can't sling those larger engines under the wings of the A380 nor the venerable 747 thus, they are stuck with less efficient, smaller engines which is why both airframes are in trouble looking at the distant future. I think Boeing engineers have found a solution for the 747 and it looks like Airbus is committed to working on a solution for the A380. It doesn't surprise me that they'll try because I doubt 150 A380s sold would recoup their $25 billion expense on researching the A380. Airbus has to find new customers for it--the mere notion they might not caused Airbus's stocks to plummet 10% yesterday.

that was not a law before boring failed to make their supersonic jet work.

Pretty sure it was the law since the 1960s, if not earlier. It's almost universal across the world too--few countries allow aircraft to go supersonic above land. Of course there's exceptions like much of Nevada but they are few and far between.

lockheed already have your government bought and paid for so i do not doubt they can get that law removed today.

The N+2 program is NASA's baby with Boeing and Lockheed collaborating. The primary result of the N+2 program is software that can predict shockwaves when crossing the sound barrier. Because of that, they can proactively design the aircraft to minimize the power of the shockwave.

Concorde was designed for speed--shockwave be damned. N+2 aircraft will be designed for sound, speed be damned (they're projecting these aircraft will be about 150 MPH slower than the Concorde). Remember, only 20 Concordes were ever built. It never was a very successful aircraft.

 

[RejZoR]

Even Concorde had problems with landing, that's why it had adjustable nose angle. It was straight for normal flight, but for landing approach, it shifted downwards in order to give pilots good visibility on the landing strip.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

The N+2 aircraft will probably use cameras and screens instead. Cockpit visibility will be horrendous without it.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Talking about the Concorde inspired me to look up some documentaries about it. Found this one and have been watching it.