Quote:
Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@Jan 28 2005, 09:15 PM
The problem is that the 747 is already too big for most airlines. The trend is to smaller planes. The market for an airplane that seats that many passengers is extremely limited. Airbus is banking on that changing. I'm not sure it will.
Boeing had a jumbo engineered and decided against putting it into production a few years ago for just that reason. Instead, they chose to go with the Dreamliner, a super-efficient medium sized narrow body aircraft. It's been selling big and it is aimed at where the market is trending.
And, yeah...I'm with you, there's no way in hell Airbus isn't being subsidized significantly.
|
The thought is with air travel being more popular and congestion of the skies only getting worse, the thing to do is have more people per flight. It's not really as much of an issue here in North America as it is in Asia. Hence why so many of the A380's sales have been in that marketplace, and other heavily travelled corridors (LHR-JFK).
Boeing's half assed attempted to combat the A380 was the 747X, a stretched and doubled decked 747. Problem was, it wasn't a major new design and still had many of the 747's inherent flaws and high operating costs. I do believe that the A380 bills itself as cheaper to operate than the 747-400, although I'll believe that when I see it.
You forgot's Boeing's alleged reason why they dropped the 747X - the Sonic Cruiser
Though hugely impractical - it sure would have restored some of the glamour and excitement of airliners again... Air Canada even commented on how it would have been iinterested in such a bird. Of course this was all pre 9/11.
And as of today, it's no longer the 7E7. It's now the 787, timed to go with a sale of 60 787's (full model #: the 787-8) to China where the number 8 is thought to be lucky.