English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Remember the fuss they made about Concorde? Now they are claiming they can't afford to make "costly" modifications to their airports to take the Airbus 380, yer right!

2007-01-18 06:56:42 · 19 answers · asked by WildCat-on-Oxygen 1 in Cars & Transportation Aircraft

attention tk - when did we convert to euro in the uk?

2007-01-18 08:42:40 · update #1

what plane could be more fit for the worlds fattest nation

2007-01-18 08:43:49 · update #2

19 answers

Just typical of their selfish and insular mentality.

The 'special relationship' with UK is based on UK backing USA up in wars that they decide to start, but in return UK (and other)businesses find all sorts of obstacles put in their way so they they can't compete on an even basis with US companies over there.


They also call their baseball competition 'The world series' even though the only time a non US team competes is on the odd occasion that a team from Canada makes it through. So they can be crowned world champions.

The mentaility of attention seeking spoilt bullies.

2007-01-18 07:06:17 · answer #1 · answered by Sonny Walkman 4 · 4 5

The A380 while a incredable piece of A/C design and fabraction is from the view of many Airlines a non starter. It's size while it's major selling point is also a major bad point. This aircraft will require the reworking of EVERY system that is in use in a modern airport. It's not just a case of the A/c parking spaces, You need bigger jetways to load the people faster because if it's not flying, it's not making money. Bigger Baggage handing systems, larger Waiting areas. Someone already mentioned Catering, Fueling will take longer. You need bigger hangers, bigger Maintenance stands, bigger Tow Vehicles, more space to park them, basiclly more of everything.

Lets look at the #1 selling airliner in the world right now. It's the Boeing 737 that is a Fact no insult to Airbus. The 737 is a MID sized passenger plane. The Airline themselves are not buying the 747's and larger planes. I'm sorry but I do not know right off hand Airbus's Mid sized plane but it is the #2 seller. And I know from having flown on Airbus A/C that they are well made machines

Now as to the whole who's better debate.
My Fellow Amreicans I give you the Dehaviland (sp?) Comet. The 1st commerical Jet Passenger A/C. It failed commericaly due to the fact that it had square windows that cracked under repeted flight stress Had those windows been Oval from the begaining? Well let's just say Boeing might not be where it is today.

My Friends in the UK. Having served with the USAF over in your wonderful nation. And having seen some of the incredable pioneering work you've done in avation. It was an American that made the 1st Powered flight, standing apon the shoulders of a WORLD of Avation Pioneers.

And Finally to answer your question about the Concorde. I personally think that it was a WONDERFUL Machine. I wish it was still flying. But the COST per Seat killed it.

2007-01-18 19:56:51 · answer #2 · answered by Wolf of the Black Moon 4 · 1 0

Outclassed??? The Concorde went broke and never made back the money invested. The Airbus 380 is way overdue because they can't get the wiring right, among other problems. The original Airbus 350 had to be cancelled and redesigned because the Boeing 787 was way ahead in the technology game. Boeing is currently stomping Airbus in the airplane orders arena. Who is outclassed here, my friend?

To other respondents, let us not disrepect the troops on either side. We have come to each other's aid and paid with lives so that we may live in freedom.

2007-01-18 19:32:12 · answer #3 · answered by RobertG 4 · 0 0

What kind of garbage are you fools spewing? Don' t you realize that every major airline here is either bankrupt or just got out of bankruptcy? Nobody here can afford that. FedEx had ordered several, but Airbus had problems making the deadline, so they had to cancel. It's not about hating Airbus, it's business! Thousands of people lost jobs because of the airlines taking a nosedive. Personally I thing the 380 is a beautiful aircraft, but look at the technology Boeing and GE have developed put into the 787 and the engines. And I don't know of any major airport here that really has room to expand for that thing. People here already whine if a damn cessna flys over their house!! But It could very well be partially because Boeing is American. It gives us jobs. And then you bring war into it, and desecrate the names of those who died from both out countries. I served for 7 years, some of the best people I met were Europeans and Brits. Have some respect and get the hell over it!!!

2007-01-18 14:27:24 · answer #4 · answered by JET_DOC 2 · 0 0

Well, several US airports HAVE budgeted the money to modify for the A380, but NOW, the thing is going to be TWO YEARS BEHIND SCHEDULE for it's initial launch. Some airports are not going to modify, because they figure that they would get 2 landings a month, and it's not worth the money.
Plus, I can imagine both customs and baggage claim at LAX if 2-3 of these monsters landed at the same time.
As for your statement:

"Now they are claiming they can't afford to make "costly" modifications to their airports to take the Airbus 380, yer right!"

I don't see you guys ponying up any money to modify OUR airports to accommodate YOUR airplane!
P.S. Beings as the thing IS 2 years behind on launch, Airbus hasn't outclassed ANYONE yet on this issue.
Of course, if it wasn't for America during WWII (seems to be a common thread here), instead of AIRBUS, it would be MESSERSCHMIDT!!!!

2007-01-19 01:58:30 · answer #5 · answered by strech 7 · 0 1

Lets take away government propping up of Airbus and see if it can then compete with Boeing.
Apart from airports that need to be reconfigured... think about all the systems that need to be changed...from catering to load planning. I know, Im in IT and my teams have been working on all the problems the purchase of 20 A380's will have on our airline. yes all very costly.
Boeing outclassed....I dont think so.

2007-01-18 15:00:01 · answer #6 · answered by split_ess 2 · 0 0

When have we ever been outclassed? The skies are full of American aircraft.I suppose we "bullied" all those foreign airlines into buying Boeing and made them cancel their orders for the 380.And to the other people that are whining about the US wanting to win at everything,thats what made us the best country in the world.We will gladly leave the losing to the rest of you.

2007-01-19 04:02:48 · answer #7 · answered by txpilot 3 · 2 1

True True. But take Boeing for example it employs over 155,000
people, It does over 60 Billion dollars in biz per anum..Fully 75% of all Commercial aircraft worldwide are Boeing .OK so what will the yanks get in return for making "costly" modifications to their airports to take the Airbus 380...Not a lot..

2007-01-18 07:14:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

There's more to it than simply modifying a runway, there are infrastructure issues. But, you are partly right, the Americans do like to win at everything.

Oh, and BTW Kyra K, I AM an Aeronautical Engineer! (In the RAF), There are all walks of life on this site!

2007-01-18 23:59:44 · answer #9 · answered by genghis41f 6 · 0 0

Jealousy because a little country like UK is paving the way as nearly always they feed on other ppls technology,develop it then say look what we've done,Would not have got to the moon without the Germans,no jet engine without the Brits.I see cherrakeef had to bring up what we in the UK owe them for the War ww2 we owe you nothing and died,bled,and suffered till VE day we were there from start to finish not on a part time basis, In fact you owe us in the UK more than you may comprehend,If you take it to a logical conclusion you would not exist but for the UK so get over you ego and go learn real history not the Hollywood Slop you turn out.

2007-01-18 07:13:45 · answer #10 · answered by Francis7 4 · 4 3

Think about it Einstein, if a company came out with a new delivery truck that happened to be 8 feet wider than the traffic lanes in London would the British government widen the streets of London? No because there is no room to do so. Land is at a premium and there is no room to expand. Its the same at aiports. They have expanded numerous times, most of them are near large cities and there is no more land available, existing runways would have to be shut down to widen if there was room and then all the runways/taxiways would have to be widened. And what would it cost? Just in construction terms ( not counting lost revenue due to closures)? Interstate highways cost over a million $ a foot. A runway has to cost more than that since it is designed for heavier traffic, tighter tolerances and longer life span.

2007-01-18 07:39:46 · answer #11 · answered by mark t 7 · 5 3

fedest.com, questions and answers