Airbus A380?

Question

A milestone in technology or just another disastrous environmental threat?

Answer 1

A milestone in technology AND another disastrous environmental threat.

Answer 2

I don't think Airbus A380 is environmental threat. Actually its a environmentally good aircraft.

First of all, A380 has the latest technology in the market all its parts has been made with thinking many years ahead. Its not a Boeing 747 which is nearly 20 years old and technology been made is much older.

Secondly it carries more people. It may spend more fuel, but if you imagine instead of two air plane, one air plane will do its job. This means one landing instead of two, this reduce the noise creates from two air planes. This means, one less flying crew flies, which are the highest payed people. Instead of servicing two air plane, there will be one air plane will be serviced and less people work for after sales and less pollution. Therefore, number of planes will be reduced. This would make that developed countries won't need as much space for airports as they need now.

Because it has the latest technology it is definitely more environmental friendly than any other planes.
It is definitely milestone in technology and I think its the good place to invest money for the future.
On the other hand I believe world need such a big air plane anyway.

Answer 3

Not an especially cutting edge design, answers a question that nobody has asked "Gee what if Airbus made a plane even BIGGER than the 747??". I don't see where it will hurt the environment any more or less than a 747. I think it might just kill the company. Boeing is just chomping to fill orders with the Dreamliner, I think this might be a more appropriate vehicle for both the near and short term and this A380 "thing" is gonna wipe them out. The gov't here in the US is in no way able to support any modifications to the airports. Although the runways and infrastructure itself should be OK with the A380 (much was made of this over nothing when the 747 went into service), the AIRLINES will need to shell out BIG bucks to modify the gates to be legal (to be able to empty aircraft in a legal amount of time when at the gate, in case of an emergency). To empty it on the tarmac in the minimum time has already been proven possible, but not AT the gate, gonna need FOUR gates (upper and lower, front and midship) to empty it AT the gate!!! Huge mods, and either Airbus or the airlines are gonna pay for it, neither one will want to. Pesky FAA and their stoopid regs!!!

Answer 4

The A380 will be an environmentally friendly aircraft, which will produce half as much noise on take-off as its competitor and consume less than 3 litres of fuel per passenger over 100 km, a rate comparable to that of an economical family car. With its greater capacity and unprecedented environmental friendliness, the A380 provides the most economical and socially responsible solution to growing air traffic on key trunk routes.

Answer 5

It is a step further of milestone in human's aviation technology when B747 was the most successful aircraft. It is more fuel efficient compare to the competing aircraft and release less carbon dioxide to the air compare to the B747. It benefit the airlines a little bit on the heavy traffic route and reduce the amount of aircrafts that needs two aircrafts in order to serve the dense route and that two midsize aircraft can put into one A380. But in the same time, many people are worried about the heavy pressure in the environment by this aircraft. Airport needs to expand their runway for this aircraft to take-off and land. It cause many green environment around the airport need to destroy in order to hold this whale at the airport.

Answer 6

As many communities and countries raise their environmental standards for aircraft allowed to fly through their airspace and land at their airports; the airlines are forced to select the ones that are environmentally sound as well as economically efficient.

Therefore, any aircraft that's found to be an "environmental threat" as you put it, will not be allowed to fly or land and, in a competitve field, would not be purchased by the airlines in the first place; thus eliminating it as a "threat" anyway.

Not Ecky Boy is wrong about we Yanks wanting to make the A-380 unviable. US Airways has already ordered some of this type.

Answer 7

Neither really. It's bigger and has the latest technology, but I wouldn't call it a "milestone."

Environmentally, it'll use a lot less gas per-passenger than many of the older jets, so it's definitely "greener."

Unfortunately, it's likely to turn into an economic threat (disaster) for EADS / Airbus.

My problem with the A380 is that it's butt-ugly! (I'm an airliner nut from way back!)

Answer 8

Could be a friend if used right. A larger plane holds more people and thus you need fewer planes to move X number of people from A to B. That in turn means less pollution and less fuel wasted to move the same number of people going to the same place. This is the future unless somebody starts building new airports as the old airports can't handle any more planes safely.

Answer 9

Milestone, more like a meter. It isn't much of an achievement...a plane that large was needed and yes, I tip my hat to airbus for making it, but I isn't like it is going to open doors and windows. Add in their delays with the project and all that jazz and the cost to built and fuel it......... it will be more of a hassle to my eyes. Airports have to make modifications to handle it....its a lot of work. Plus, they are letting it out at the same time Boeing is unveiling the Dreamliner (which is a much more realistic aircraft). By the time Airbus fills 5 orders, Boeing will probably be handing 787's out like there is no tomorrow and probably be working on a new plane!

Answer 10

Because of the number of passengers that it can carry, the A380 is, per head more environmentally friendly than a lot of other aircraft.