@@xiaoka Except she is getting pensioned off too, and the bread and butter for both makers is the class occupied by the A320/737, where the A320 has out-sold the 737 for most of its life and without the jeed for generous military subsidies, oops, sales that Boeing has always benefited from. Oh, and to pre-empt the usual "there have been more 737's built" claims, read what I wrote first, as I refer specifically to rate of sales. Total A320 sales will exceed those of the 737 fairly soon and after 20 years less time on the market, and without a 2 year grounding.
I wish the A380 would have been more successful had it been launched decades earlier. That way more variants would have been developed and would have sold in the hundreds by now.
Well, timing is everything. Airbus might not have been able to fund such an expensive, biggest ever project 20 years earlier. Only when Airbus had matured organizationally and in the global market could they undertake such a huge risk. Turned out to be 10-20 years too late, and major market changes have occurred. So the final count of giant commercial aircraft will be right around (1558) B747 to (243) A380. It is sad to see the B747 rapidly being phased out fleets as well.
@@maverickchakraborty9578 they had to sell (lease for the long term) at least 400 units to make up for the costs. Let alone profit from it. Edit: If I remembered correctly.
@@fyt54321 if a project is to ambitious aircraft companies collaborate like on the concorde and eurofighter. I just think airbus was just affraid to attempt it. The market was there, they just didnt belief in it. As they saw other manufacturers run into development issues, like lockheed and mcDonnel Douglas.
Flew on the upper deck of a British Airways A380 from Boston to Heathrow a few years ago, one of my favorite flights ever. So smooth and quiet. Wish we had more of these massive aircraft around
The a380 program was still a success I'd say. A lot happened in the background that helped Airbus and its product line become much more modern, optimized and competitive. Many features of the a350 were initially developed for the a380, like break to vacate. And I think that in a couple decades, some markets will become too saturated and there will be demand for large double-deckers again, even doing p2p.
Extremely big picture maybe it was a success, but in pure accounting terms, the A380 was a money losing program which never broke even (a failure). By the time a large 4-engine style/500 passenger airliner is in demand again the A380 won't be competitive because of newer technologies available at that time (I'm guessing at least 15 years).
I am so happy that I flew with an Airbus A380 in December of 2019 - shortly before COVID hit. It was probably my first and last time flying with it. It was really nice - even in Economy.
It's really comfortable to fly with, I was lucky enough to fly in all 3 classes with it (I was fortunate to get a free upgrade to business class once from premium economy)
I've never had the chance to fly on the A380. I've seen it several times at Changi in Singapore. It's quite an impressive looking plane. Great video btw.
As exciting as that sounds, that would be a stressful situation to be in. Imagine the gate area, and all the people waiting for a long time to get on the plane. Same for the baggage claim area - imagine how long you'd have to wait to find your bag.
During a familiarization class given by AirBus for the rollout of the A350, I was able to walk thru the assembly building for the A380 in Toulouse FR. Workers were putting the cockpit wiring and related equipment in place up front but the rest of A/C was bare and vacant. With no interior and no floorboards or bulkheads in the main cabin, it was a huge, dark cave of impressive size.
2020 was a bit of a black swan year. Believe air travel had been growing reasonably well for the prior two plus decades, with exceptions for 911/recession and the Great Recession...
Exactly how you stated: plane that we love. I did at least 20 long haul trips on board of an A380 ( CAN-DBX-GRU-DBX-CAN) and I can affirm it’s my second favorite airplane ✈️ for passenger comfort, the 1st one is the A350 ( I have fear of flight, I know it’s dumb, however my subconscious wins over my reasoning been, my first flight ✈️ onboard of the A350 I almost got panic attack due lack of noise, I got the impression the turbines weren’t get trust enough to lift the plane hahahahahaha)
A380 lack the cabinpressure turbine and the water recyceling system that A350 and dreamliner have. This allow them to have higher pressure, less noice and wetter air (aircraft air is usuay very very dry. This is the main reason A350 and B787 feals so nice but you cant put your finger ln why. The system also saves fuel, the actually original reason why they have it. It strange that they opted not to install the system on the A330 neo. That is why A330 neo cant share engines with the B787.
I haven't got on A350 B787, but I did couple trips on A380. So in my "experience" A380 is the most quit airplane, especially after take off when engines reduce the thrust, it feels like we're still on the ground :)
Obrigado you for flying Emirates! 😁 You might have been one of my passengers. ✈ GRU-DXB is even considered ultra long haul (ULR flight). I use to hear passengers often saying how much they like the 350 while flying on 380. If the plan hasn't changed EK should be getting the 350 (with some 330s) instead of the last 380s ordered that will not be built.
@4:16 > Aérospatiale is the ancestor and French part of Airbus, known after renaming as "Airbus France". For a long time, final assembly of AIrbus aircraft was done at their HQ in Toulouse, France. Today they are in charge of a lot of things, including integration, cockpit and most avionics, and final assembly of the whole family except obviously A220. > BAE is the other ancestor and English part of Airbus, before the UK pulled out of the Airbus project. UK's aero industry was saved by (if I recall correctly) the German gov't providing funds needed by the UK companies to build large production facilities to remain in the Airbus project (mainly for wings, in Broughton). Today they are mainly in charge of landing gear and wings. > CASA is the Spanish part of Airbus. Most of its experience was in designing and building in military aircraft. They are now a big part of the military programs, and notably took over the responsibilities on the A400M and A300-MRTT (the military-oriented transport/tanker). Today they are mainly in charge of the tail section, including APU. > Deutsche Aerospace is obviously the German part of Airbus. They are based in Hamburg. Don't know much about their history, but they have a sweet Boeing Super Guppy exposed on site. Today they are mainly in charge of the cabin along with other things (evacuation, external lights,...). All Airbus aircrafts have their cabin installed in Hamburg. They also have an A320 final assembly plant, and an A380 delivery center (but final assembly is done in Toulouse).
"C'mon, Pierre, you guys will be okay! So, it didn't work as a passenger plane - no problem. Just flip the nose up and you can use it as a cargo plane..." Pierre - "Sacré bleu!!!"
Maybe not too late ,you know the aviation industry ,but in the late eighties BA was asking the industry for a truly giant airliner I have a print of what looked like a triple decker in BA landor livery it was published in flight basically looking like a massive MD12/A380 has anyone ever seen this painting ,maybe one day things will turn again as landing slots and airport expansion becomes harder look at Heathrow so as they say watch this space ,great posting as always thank you 😊👍🏻
Airbus should of concentrated more on both the cargo version and the ability to convert to cargo than all these multitude passenger focused versions. Many cargo planes spend a good deal of their lives as passenger planes before conversion and airbuses total disregard for this aspect has bitten them hard. The 380 is almost impossible to convert effectively unlike the 747 which is extremely easy to do so, airbus should of focused on this as even before covid those 747 were coming to end of life and the 380 could of been an excellent replacement mass hauler. Instead we now see many barely used (in airframe time) 380 either going to scrap or "retired" way too early.
The a380 has to much volume to be an effective cargo plane. It would need bigger wings and 6 engines so to max out its payload capability. But there is also a logistical problem. The a380 fuselage is much taller than the 747. Would they do 2 or 3 levels for cargo? 2 would help for oversized stuff but very ineffective economically.
_>unlike the 747 which is extremely easy to do so_ The Jumbo had the privilege to be born in an era when the Cold War created funkloads of theoretical niches only itwas capable to fill: Double-deck intercontinental airliner? check Cargo-transport? check Semi-militarized presidential transport with extensive self-defense capabilities? check Long-range aerial-refueling tanker? check Aerospace surveilance and lectronic warfare? check Military missile command mobile HQ? check Airborne ICBM launcer? check Anti-ballistic/anti-satellite *freaking LAZORS!?* check! Flying fighter-jet carrier? *FREAKING CHECK!*
The 380 isn't really comparable, the 747 transformed the globe and has been in service for half a century and will be still hauling cargo after the last 380 is scrap.
people forget just how revolutionary the 747 was when launched. The biggest planes before the 747 were single isle planes comparable in size to the 757. the 707/720 and DC-8, which at most seated 200 people. All of a sudden there is this TWIN ISLE double-decker that seats 400+ people? not a gradual ramping up with single deck widebody planes first, no just straight up double decker widebody. It's insane when you think about it
The perfect 747 rival would have at least had a variant that was competitive as a freighter. As it is there will be 747 freighters flying for at least the next 25 years. A380's still flying in 15 years? Unlikely....
I think there will be a new big plane arriving for cargo purposes. The order online market is only going to grow even further, the key to winning is going to be purpose built efficient planes of varying sizes.
Emirates will probably keep the A 380s until 2030 (since it's the perfect aircraft for their business model), the 747 cargo aircraft get competition by the new 777-X cargo version, the produced 747-8 F will of course still fly for at least 15 years.
@@yadoo8164 not directly, the reason why they never offered a factory freighter based on the 777-300 ER. However, with the production end of the 747 they need something new in this size, which is the new 777 Freighter which is bigger than the old one based on the 777- 200
Airplanes are my favorite topic! And the A380 is the most magnificent aircraft ever! Pity that this is a marvelous piece of engineering that is already old. It should have been launched, at least, a decade ago.
Boeing and Airbus came up with different answers to the question. In the end Boeing ended up making the right choice. Boeing’s was the 787, Airbus came up with the A-380. The acknowledgement of the choice was the development of the A-350. Boeing did do an 747-8, but by then, the market had changed. Boeing’s ace in the hole feature was the Freighter variant. The F model allowed for additional sales which otherwise would not have taken place. Both the A380 and 747-8 are good airplanes, but the A350. Modernized A330, 787, 777-200/300 and 777x are the winners. The single isle market is dominated by the A320 series, and boings 737-8(Max) is probably the last bite of the 737 apple. The safety issues with the Max have been ironed out. It’s economic performance in the market will determine if it can continue to compete with the A320 neo family. There are 700 737 max models which are going to take to the skies over the next 15 months or so. That’s going to be an interesting service model to watch. The A380 is on its way out of the market, along with the 747. The latest 777-X is going to replace the 747-400.
The market changes all the time. The Bombardier-A220 currently is the winner, and ironically jeopardizes the A320neo market, while the success of the A321XLR pressures Boeing to develop a mid of the market clean sheet. But the 737max took a lot of resources to get airborne safely, as well as the still unapproved 777-8 and -9. I do not see the issues with the A350 (or did I read that wrong). The 787 is doing great. Some airlines have resurrected their A380ies. The market changes all the time….
Personally, while i love the A380, i sometimes thinking that it might be too big for most airport around the world. I wonder if the design of the A380 (or A370) are quite more simple, basically the size between 747-400 and 777-200, with 777-like wings, something like MD-12 (or A380-700). Nonetheless, it looks nicely, although sadly in wrong time. And if i'm not mistaken, the engine itself are also the problem, given it didn't get the next gen engine like 787/A350.
The plans to reengine it were crossed out (A380neo) after the manufacturer realised that the relevance of quard jets for passenger airliners was no more.
That was awesome! 😄 I loved it! All the designs before the A380 itself sure are amazing and not to mention huge. And speaking of huge planes, when might you plan on doing the Boeing NLA(New Large Airplane) video? Here’s information you can use in that video. Boeing also did 3 other similar programs around the same time called the VLCT(Very Large Commercial Transport), The N650, and LAPD(Large Aircraft Product Development). Boeing had proposed over 100 NLA designs with the biggest having a 290 foot wingspan, a MTOW of 1.7 million lbs, and reaching 280 feet in length. The preliminary NLA design was 70 meters long, had a 260 wingspan, and would seat 606 passengers, while the stretch version was over 91 meters and had seating for at least 750 passengers. Does that sound cool to you? 😀
Amazing how two years can change things. the 787 has NOT crushed the A380 market, Airbus with its A350 still leads Boeing in time-appropriate aircraft, and the A380 while no longer in production, is being brought back by several airlines, to fill the need it was designed for. Predicting the future is a very dangerous pastime.
Even though the a380 was a commercial failure, the technology developed for it lives on in airbus' much more successful products. The A350 is by far my favourite plane flying at the minute!
@@michaelbujaki2462 why didn’t they make the whole front section swing open (like the guppy I believe) or a rear ramp like the C5? and then make all four engines reverse thrust
Who ordered new 747s? Last I heard the assembly line is shutting down soon after the last one of the line which is happening spoils may have already happened.
I still think there's a market for it. The Hub and spoke model will always exist. You can increase point-to-point, but there's only so many flights you can have out of an airport like Heathrow. Eventually you'll have to increase the airplane size to popular regions. They should have made an A380 with composite folding wings, a smaller vertical stabilizer, new engines, and new Avionics/cabin etc. Maybe move the cockpit to the Second Story and make a nose door for cargo?
Even if it will never exist (what a shame), a special version of the A380-1000 will always be my dream. A GINORMOUS GOD of a plane with only 2 huge motors !!! The nice looking Boeing 777-10X would be 100% like "Ight, Imma Head Out" x'D That being said, tbh if such a plane would be developed today almost from scratch (since we already have the final design), with all our current techs and a little bit beyond (2025-27, rather than old stone age 2000 techs), it really would be feasible quite easily. And even with difficulties, quite a chalenge would be awesome for the industry, the Concorde and A380 programs have brought SO MUCH innovations thanks to their developments. The holy trinity combinason of New materials + IA generative design + 3D printing would greatly help in achieving such a marvel. Also a Massive use of carbon fiber would be welcome, since the A380 have almost no CF/composits in comparison with modern aircraft (23% in the A380, 53% in the A350 XWB). Around 80 would be great. Then two ginormous RR Ultrafan or Open Rotor motors will lift this beast =)
It is said that the king of the skies did not rule for more than 10 years, but flying on one of those planes, especially with a Gulf airline, is a unique experience. The good news; Airbus learned a very valuable lesson from this adventure, how to be flexible and efficient and how to analyze the markets. Today, they have an extremely competitive replacement in the form of the A350, A321XLR and the A220 (kind of cheating, but they have it) as well as the "classical" models. Unfortunately, the glory days of the A380 double decker experience is over - except if you fly on few selected airlines.
The hub and spoke concept is self limiting due to the capacity of the hub airports - with growth, hubs will encounter real estate and operational limits, resulting in a limited number of flights and increasing ATC delays. Add to that the limited number of airports that can handle the A380 and it was questionable from the git go... Point to point makes more sense, and Boeing obviously made the right call when they scrapped their 747 follow on jumbo for the 787 that can operate at any airport served by jet transports... An interesting addition to this video would be HOW Airbus planned to load and unload the A380F version...
3-5-3 seating seems like a nightmare. 2-5-2 on the 777 already sucks so much. I had to sit in the center seat from Rio to Miami and it was really terrible.
Interesting, at 5:19 the billboard backdrop moves one frame for every three frames that the text and overlays move, and it's extremely disconcerting. lol was this fixed/prevented in future videos?
They built it with the intention of making money, but failed to earn back the cost of development. Seeing aircraft being scrapped after as little as 10 years of service can hardly be called a success. There are hundreds of these aircraft and they have essentially no value...it’s costing the owners money to store them!
@@jacksons1010 They are only few hundreds. You are only looking at the cost and ownership of the A380 but you don't see what a marvel it is and what it means to the future of Airbus as a company. Yes it came late but Airbus realised it sooner and cut the cable on production even when airlines such as Emirates were still making orders on it. Before putting production to a halt after just a few hundred made, Airbus employed it's technology in the A350, one of the most, if not the most advanced passenger aircraft we have in the skies today.and will be used in future production aircraft to come without need of investing billions in R&D. That's would mean that the decades long of developing the A380 did not go to waste and that can be defined as success to Airbus.
@@mojamoja3962 You are engaging in pointless rationalization. The A380 failed in the marketplace, that’s an undeniable fact, and there is little technological commonality with the far superior A350.
I do believe a lot of it was down to European pride and stubbornness. Airbus has long been a sign of unity in Europe, with each major plane section being manufactured in various countries before being assembled in France. It wants to be seen as a success whenever possible. Because the 747, an American plane, had long reigned the skies as the largest passenger aircraft, I personally think the EU and top brass at Airbus simply couldn’t resist the opportunity to one-up the US. Essentially a 1980’s vanity project that actually happened. Don’t get me wrong, the A380 is one of my favourite planes and I’m definitely an Airbus guy. However, anybody looking at this in 1988 from a purely practical and responsible point of view wouldn’t have let this project happen in the first place. The EU governments were writing cheques out for Airbus left, right and centre to bankroll the A380 programme. Either Airbus forecasters displayed an incredible lack of foresight by putting all their chips on hub-and-spoke, or they knew what would happen but were overruled by management and politicians. Who knows. Never mind all that. Let’s just enjoy this wonder of the skies while we can! Great video btw!
Don't worry, Emirates convinced Airbus to bring up the brand-new A380neo.Maybe Airbus will work on it from 2020 to 2025 and focus on efficiency.I hope so.....
Four Trent 972-84 engines have a total trust of 1427 kN, while three GE9X-105B1A engines have a total trust of 1467 kN. Would a trijet variant of A380 with the GE9X engines be more fuel efficient?
It likely would have been. But fuel efficiency wasn’t the only factor that led the A380s demise. The bigger factor was the shift of airlines away from the hub and spoke model. The A380 was not an easy plane for airlines to fill with passengers. And every empty seat really hurt the economics of justifying it. I think Boeing better understood this dynamic because the airlines had been flying the 747 for several decades. A number of airlines used the 747 more for its range than seating capacity. It’s not all bad news for Airbus. The 320 NEO and the recent 220 acquisition will serve the plane maker well for many years to come. Meanwhile Boeing still can’t figure out what it’s doing in that area.
Well I am extremely sad to see how airlines are retiring A380 fleet due to the pandemic.😢😢😢😢 Despite I never had a ride on A380, but I am very much fascinated by this aircraft with B747. I love the aircraft because of its shape, size, & the design. A380 is always a history making aircraft especially for an airliner like Emirates, Who never have signed an alliance, but became the largest operator of the aircraft & providing luxurious comfort across all the classes which other airlines do with the support of an alliance. I really wish this pandemic to end soon & Airbus to start re-building more A380's for the next 3 decades. It is hard to see Boeing Producing B747's since 51 years & they are still under production, while Airbus A380 just stopped production of A380 in just 18 years & all the operators are stuck with A380-800 while Boeing 747 have several variants startig from B747-SP to B747-8i. Hopefully by next few decades, there will be more advanced aircrafts. Well lets hope for the best😁😁😁😁
I wonder but, is if true that there was a proposition on Boeing and airbus would have worked together to make the largest plane in the 90s or is it just those internet fake news?
The interesting thing is that with the limitations in slots at big airports the A380 and other big planes seem to become popular again, but no one produces these super large planes any more.
@maverick aviation No they thought about it back in 60's while doing the initial development of the 747. There were several different configurations of double-decker designs studied. You can find models of Boeing double decker 747 studies done in 60's on google.
Boeing didn't actually think of it first, and the 747 was not the first double deck aircraft to fly, the XC-99 actually holds that distinction, and it also proved the feasibility of such an aircraft. The knowledge gained by Convair, the USAF, and the aviation industry as a whole, laid the groundwork for the 747, C-5, and even the big Antonovs(124 and 225)
@@dankinusmc1 I said full double deck jet - jet. XC-99 is not a jet plus it wasn't the first double deck aircraft to fly either. Boeing C-97 Stratofreighter and Boeing 377 Stratocruiser flew before XC-99 did. Unless I missed something when doing quick research on Google, XC-99 was the first large double deck aircraft designed from ground up to fly.
@@samwheat1302, you had it right, the XC-99 was designed specifically to be a full double deck aircraft, and like the B-36, there was a proposal to convert the design to all jet with a 35° wing sweep. But that aircraft proved the concept was valid to the sectors named, and spurred the development of heavy transporters for decades to come
I feel like saying they had the idea back in the 80’s is being a bit vague about what counts as the A380, I don’t think you can just count anything that fits the criteria of “what if airplane but huge?”
If it had reached the market 5-years sooner, it was predicted that it could have broken even, and had it entered the market 10 years earlier it would have turned a profit, even allowing for maybe 100 or so freghtets which would still be in yhe air today.
If only the 2-2-2-2 could pass the wind tunnel and other accepted standards of aviation, that would be the best layout for a Premium Economy seat configuration .
The A380 probably would have been the perfect rival to the 747, as well as the DC-10 and the Lockheed L-1011 if the A380 had been introduced in the early 1970's, the same time as the rest of these wide-bodies. By 2007, smaller, longer-range efficient twin-engine aircraft had been developed, which destroyed much of the spoke-and-hub model of long-range airline routes that the wide-body jets were made for.
The 747 is also commercially dead, excepted as a cargo aircraft. The new 747 is the 777. The 747-8 passenger version didn't sell really well too, and the 400s are now mostly retired in passenger service
@@corolla9545 you can fly A 380 with Emirates (they plan to keep them until 2030) and with BA, even now at the moment. Emirates alone operates 123 380s, while 48 747-8 passenger jets have been built. So both are still in service, but both are no longer offered by the manufacturers
And the launch date. The 747 was pretty old when the A380 came out. Not much of an improvement considering it came 30 years later, and was designed using computers
As someone who works in the business it's always fun to see everyone's theories and opinions. Some are interesting thoughts; others are completely wrong and it's always fun 😊
Imagine if 10-20 years ago we cleared regulatory hurdles for small modular nuclear reactors. And moved over to hydrogen for airplane engines. All the airports could have SMRs making cheap hydrogen fuel on site. It’s already a high security environment for concerns about theft of nuclear material. All the airplanes running co2 free with no produced co2 to transport fuel to the airports.
Okay, so convert it to maximum seating - 1,000 or so - no first class or bars or sky suites. Replace three of your aircraft that hold 300 passengers with one A380 and use it from major city to major city: NYC to London; L.A. to Tokyo, Paris to Dallas. Wouldn't THAT work?
Ha and Airbus fooled Boeing into cancelling the NMA and stretching the 737 instead of continued development on the more modern 757. Who's the fool now?
@@stevewallace1117 yep Boeing worked with Southwest to keep stretching the 737 and have the stretch need no pilot training. They listened to their biggest customer at the expense of their reputation, shareholder value, balance sheet, mid term competitive position.
I think the reason why A380 wasn't that successfully as it could have been is because of its size. No matter how you put it as fuel cost per seat-mile; it consumes a lot of fuel while the industry is going for smaller, lighter and more efficiency air crafts such as the Dreamliner and A350's. And the market already had a giant, the 747, I think it never really was any need for something yet bigger and chunkier. Because unlike the slim outfit and design like the beautiful A350 and Dreamliner, the A380 is a truly big and chunky aircraft which could had a much better design indeed. I've got the feeling Airbus built that thing just because they could, and I believe that is the reason why it became so short lived.
The fuel consumption isn't that high (around 3 l per 100 km abs seat, on par with the 747-8), however it's not simple to sell enough seats because there are that much. 787 and A 350 consume around 2,5 l per seat and 100km, but they are simpler to fill because the seat capacity is lower, but still big enough for most routes. At the end it was the inflexibility which was the biggest disadvantage of the 380
The A380 is such a comfortable aircraft it is a shame that they have closed down production. Why can't they make this plane with two bigger engines instead of four smaller ones ?
The four "smaller" engines are as big as anything else you'll find on the market. An engine of which two would be powerful enough to power an A380 just wouldn't be practical
bigger engines probably require greater ground clearance meaning the wings would need to be moved up on the fuselage or the landing gear extended or some combination. That is not easy or cheap to do without designing a completely new plane.
Doesn't matter how many videos I see on the A380, they all have the same sad ending.
Very true
Try wathing a video from 2006
It’s a wonderful ending. It was a vanity project.
The queen always wins in the end!
@@xiaoka Except she is getting pensioned off too, and the bread and butter for both makers is the class occupied by the A320/737, where the A320 has out-sold the 737 for most of its life and without the jeed for generous military subsidies, oops, sales that Boeing has always benefited from. Oh, and to pre-empt the usual "there have been more 737's built" claims, read what I wrote first, as I refer specifically to rate of sales. Total A320 sales will exceed those of the 737 fairly soon and after 20 years less time on the market, and without a 2 year grounding.
Found And Explain: "how we got the plane that we know and love today"
Me: "yeah"
Airline companies: "no"
I wish the A380 would have been more successful had it been launched decades earlier. That way more variants would have been developed and would have sold in the hundreds by now.
Well, timing is everything. Airbus might not have been able to fund such an expensive, biggest ever project 20 years earlier. Only when Airbus had matured organizationally and in the global market could they undertake such a huge risk. Turned out to be 10-20 years too late, and major market changes have occurred. So the final count of giant commercial aircraft will be right around (1558) B747 to (243) A380. It is sad to see the B747 rapidly being phased out fleets as well.
Airbus already sold hundreds
@@maverickchakraborty9578 they had to sell (lease for the long term) at least 400 units to make up for the costs. Let alone profit from it.
Edit: If I remembered correctly.
@@fyt54321 if a project is to ambitious aircraft companies collaborate like on the concorde and eurofighter. I just think airbus was just affraid to attempt it. The market was there, they just didnt belief in it. As they saw other manufacturers run into development issues, like lockheed and mcDonnel Douglas.
If it launched earlier then it would need 5 or 6 engines, even worse airplane.
Flew on the upper deck of a British Airways A380 from Boston to Heathrow a few years ago, one of my favorite flights ever. So smooth and quiet. Wish we had more of these massive aircraft around
The a380 program was still a success I'd say. A lot happened in the background that helped Airbus and its product line become much more modern, optimized and competitive. Many features of the a350 were initially developed for the a380, like break to vacate.
And I think that in a couple decades, some markets will become too saturated and there will be demand for large double-deckers again, even doing p2p.
Extremely big picture maybe it was a success, but in pure accounting terms, the A380 was a money losing program which never broke even (a failure). By the time a large 4-engine style/500 passenger airliner is in demand again the A380 won't be competitive because of newer technologies available at that time (I'm guessing at least 15 years).
Would have it not been easier to just build the A350 like Boing did with the 787 and skip the whole A380 debacle?
Sometimes I wonder, where'd you find all these images on your videos? I rarely seen them
Research!
Looo8
@@FoundAndExplained wow keep on making vids
I think he renders them himself, like Mustard. If yes, we are watching a legend
@@hueitor1748 all the 3d and some of the 2d is done by me, but some others are from authors in the space who I have permission to show off.
I really appreciate the dynamic infographics
I am so happy that I flew with an Airbus A380 in December of 2019 - shortly before COVID hit. It was probably my first and last time flying with it. It was really nice - even in Economy.
It's really comfortable to fly with, I was lucky enough to fly in all 3 classes with it (I was fortunate to get a free upgrade to business class once from premium economy)
This needs updating really because it’s making a bit of a comeback
1:00 Graphic says 2020, narration says 2000. 6:34. There's our new word of the week. Triple deckle!
I've never had the chance to fly on the A380. I've seen it several times at Changi in Singapore. It's quite an impressive looking plane. Great video btw.
Imagine if hub to hub model continued, triple deck places!
planes or places
Both since I like to visit many airports
As exciting as that sounds, that would be a stressful situation to be in. Imagine the gate area, and all the people waiting for a long time to get on the plane. Same for the baggage claim area - imagine how long you'd have to wait to find your bag.
@@emmanuelgeorge the gate would be a problem, however it wouldn’t take that long for your luggage as it probably stays with you due to lack of space.
God I wish
The cork board makes it feel like I'm planning an Airbus GTA5 heist
So good
During a familiarization class given by AirBus for the rollout of the A350, I was able to walk thru the assembly building for the A380 in Toulouse FR. Workers were putting the cockpit wiring and related equipment in place up front but the rest of A/C was bare and vacant. With no interior and no floorboards or bulkheads in the main cabin, it was a huge, dark cave of impressive size.
Air travel to double by 2020? that diden't age well. xD
Yep
Air travel cut in half
@@iitzUpis More
2020 was a bit of a black swan year. Believe air travel had been growing reasonably well for the prior two plus decades, with exceptions for 911/recession and the Great Recession...
Didn't (just to make him edit this comment and change it to Didn't)
Exactly how you stated: plane that we love. I did at least 20 long haul trips on board of an A380 ( CAN-DBX-GRU-DBX-CAN) and I can affirm it’s my second favorite airplane ✈️ for passenger comfort, the 1st one is the A350 ( I have fear of flight, I know it’s dumb, however my subconscious wins over my reasoning been, my first flight ✈️ onboard of the A350 I almost got panic attack due lack of noise, I got the impression the turbines weren’t get trust enough to lift the plane hahahahahaha)
A380 lack the cabinpressure turbine and the water recyceling system that A350 and dreamliner have. This allow them to have higher pressure, less noice and wetter air (aircraft air is usuay very very dry.
This is the main reason A350 and B787 feals so nice but you cant put your finger ln why. The system also saves fuel, the actually original reason why they have it.
It strange that they opted not to install the system on the A330 neo. That is why A330 neo cant share engines with the B787.
I haven't got on A350 B787, but I did couple trips on A380. So in my "experience" A380 is the most quit airplane, especially after take off when engines reduce the thrust, it feels like we're still on the ground :)
@@Ascarbek yes, especially when you're sitting in front of the engines
Obrigado you for flying Emirates! 😁
You might have been one of my passengers. ✈
GRU-DXB is even considered ultra long haul (ULR flight).
I use to hear passengers often saying how much they like the 350 while flying on 380.
If the plan hasn't changed EK should be getting the 350 (with some 330s) instead of the last 380s ordered that will not be built.
@4:16 > Aérospatiale is the ancestor and French part of Airbus, known after renaming as "Airbus France". For a long time, final assembly of AIrbus aircraft was done at their HQ in Toulouse, France. Today they are in charge of a lot of things, including integration, cockpit and most avionics, and final assembly of the whole family except obviously A220.
> BAE is the other ancestor and English part of Airbus, before the UK pulled out of the Airbus project. UK's aero industry was saved by (if I recall correctly) the German gov't providing funds needed by the UK companies to build large production facilities to remain in the Airbus project (mainly for wings, in Broughton). Today they are mainly in charge of landing gear and wings.
> CASA is the Spanish part of Airbus. Most of its experience was in designing and building in military aircraft. They are now a big part of the military programs, and notably took over the responsibilities on the A400M and A300-MRTT (the military-oriented transport/tanker). Today they are mainly in charge of the tail section, including APU.
> Deutsche Aerospace is obviously the German part of Airbus. They are based in Hamburg. Don't know much about their history, but they have a sweet Boeing Super Guppy exposed on site. Today they are mainly in charge of the cabin along with other things (evacuation, external lights,...). All Airbus aircrafts have their cabin installed in Hamburg. They also have an A320 final assembly plant, and an A380 delivery center (but final assembly is done in Toulouse).
"C'mon, Pierre, you guys will be okay! So, it didn't work as a passenger plane - no problem. Just flip the nose up and you can use it as a cargo plane..."
Pierre - "Sacré bleu!!!"
I'd love to see your interpretation of the double bubble design
Maybe not too late ,you know the aviation industry ,but in the late eighties BA was asking the industry for a truly giant airliner I have a print of what looked like a triple decker in BA landor livery it was published in flight basically looking like a massive MD12/A380 has anyone ever seen this painting ,maybe one day things will turn again as landing slots and airport expansion becomes harder look at Heathrow so as they say watch this space ,great posting as always thank you 😊👍🏻
I'm guessing you know someone called Kate.
Hehehehe typo it’s this iPhone I’ll correct but Kate mmm the one with the big eyes 😜
Airbus should of concentrated more on both the cargo version and the ability to convert to cargo than all these multitude passenger focused versions.
Many cargo planes spend a good deal of their lives as passenger planes before conversion and airbuses total disregard for this aspect has bitten them hard.
The 380 is almost impossible to convert effectively unlike the 747 which is extremely easy to do so, airbus should of focused on this as even before covid those 747 were coming to end of life and the 380 could of been an excellent replacement mass hauler.
Instead we now see many barely used (in airframe time) 380 either going to scrap or "retired" way too early.
Airbus should have concentrated on improving the A340-500/600 models instead, and made the A340-500 available as a cargo transport.
As well as a longer range, a340-600 using the a340-500 but a slightly bigger fuselage with larger fuel tanks and improved engines
The a380 has to much volume to be an effective cargo plane. It would need bigger wings and 6 engines so to max out its payload capability.
But there is also a logistical problem. The a380 fuselage is much taller than the 747. Would they do 2 or 3 levels for cargo? 2 would help for oversized stuff but very ineffective economically.
And Boeing should have built the Pelican.
_>unlike the 747 which is extremely easy to do so_
The Jumbo had the privilege to be born in an era when the Cold War created funkloads of theoretical niches only itwas capable to fill:
Double-deck intercontinental airliner? check
Cargo-transport? check
Semi-militarized presidential transport with extensive self-defense capabilities? check
Long-range aerial-refueling tanker? check
Aerospace surveilance and lectronic warfare? check
Military missile command mobile HQ? check
Airborne ICBM launcer? check
Anti-ballistic/anti-satellite *freaking LAZORS!?* check!
Flying fighter-jet carrier? *FREAKING CHECK!*
I hope airbus does a revive just like the a300, i really love this plane, it sad to see it get discontinued.
I like how this pops up on my recommendation a week before I fly on one.
Really liked everything about this video, subscribed and liked immediately
The 380 isn't really comparable, the 747 transformed the globe and has been in service for half a century and will be still hauling cargo after the last 380 is scrap.
people forget just how revolutionary the 747 was when launched. The biggest planes before the 747 were single isle planes comparable in size to the 757. the 707/720 and DC-8, which at most seated 200 people. All of a sudden there is this TWIN ISLE double-decker that seats 400+ people? not a gradual ramping up with single deck widebody planes first, no just straight up double decker widebody. It's insane when you think about it
@@trymetal95 The economics of the 747 brought air travel to the average person.
It's also beautiful, not a over-utilitarian fatass.
I love this video as it is factual and very entertaining!! Thank you!!!
The perfect 747 rival would have at least had a variant that was competitive as a freighter. As it is there will be 747 freighters flying for at least the next 25 years. A380's still flying in 15 years? Unlikely....
I think there will be a new big plane arriving for cargo purposes. The order online market is only going to grow even further, the key to winning is going to be purpose built efficient planes of varying sizes.
Emirates will probably keep the A 380s until 2030 (since it's the perfect aircraft for their business model), the 747 cargo aircraft get competition by the new 777-X cargo version, the produced 747-8 F will of course still fly for at least 15 years.
Emirates will keep the A380 until the mid 2030s
@@simonm1447 Boeing would try to compete with themselves lol?
@@yadoo8164 not directly, the reason why they never offered a factory freighter based on the 777-300 ER. However, with the production end of the 747 they need something new in this size, which is the new 777 Freighter which is bigger than the old one based on the 777- 200
Airplanes are my favorite topic! And the A380 is the most magnificent aircraft ever! Pity that this is a marvelous piece of engineering that is already old. It should have been launched, at least, a decade ago.
Everything takes time to decide the last and best idea
Airbus really thought taking the upper deck and extending it all the way back, was some revolutionary idea no one thought of lmaoo
Boeing and Airbus came up with different answers to the question. In the end Boeing ended up making the right choice. Boeing’s was the 787, Airbus came up with the A-380. The acknowledgement of the choice was the development of the A-350. Boeing did do an 747-8, but by then, the market had changed. Boeing’s ace in the hole feature was the Freighter variant. The F model allowed for additional sales which otherwise would not have taken place. Both the A380 and 747-8 are good airplanes, but the A350. Modernized A330, 787, 777-200/300 and 777x are the winners. The single isle market is dominated by the A320 series, and boings 737-8(Max) is probably the last bite of the 737 apple. The safety issues with the Max have been ironed out. It’s economic performance in the market will determine if it can continue to compete with the A320 neo family. There are 700 737 max models which are going to take to the skies over the next 15 months or so. That’s going to be an interesting service model to watch. The A380 is on its way out of the market, along with the 747. The latest 777-X is going to replace the 747-400.
The market changes all the time. The Bombardier-A220 currently is the winner, and ironically jeopardizes the A320neo market, while the success of the A321XLR pressures Boeing to develop a mid of the market clean sheet. But the 737max took a lot of resources to get airborne safely, as well as the still unapproved 777-8 and -9. I do not see the issues with the A350 (or did I read that wrong). The 787 is doing great. Some airlines have resurrected their A380ies. The market changes all the time….
I love your videos keep up the good work
Thank you for your kind words
If Airbus had built the A380F then that would have defiantly saved the A380 program
Personally, while i love the A380, i sometimes thinking that it might be too big for most airport around the world.
I wonder if the design of the A380 (or A370) are quite more simple, basically the size between 747-400 and 777-200, with 777-like wings, something like MD-12 (or A380-700).
Nonetheless, it looks nicely, although sadly in wrong time. And if i'm not mistaken, the engine itself are also the problem, given it didn't get the next gen engine like 787/A350.
The plans to reengine it were crossed out (A380neo) after the manufacturer realised that the relevance of quard jets for passenger airliners was no more.
That was awesome! 😄 I loved it! All the designs before the A380 itself sure are amazing and not to mention huge. And speaking of huge planes, when might you plan on doing the Boeing NLA(New Large Airplane) video? Here’s information you can use in that video. Boeing also did 3 other similar programs around the same time called the VLCT(Very Large Commercial Transport), The N650, and LAPD(Large Aircraft Product Development). Boeing had proposed over 100 NLA designs with the biggest having a 290 foot wingspan, a MTOW of 1.7 million lbs, and reaching 280 feet in length. The preliminary NLA design was 70 meters long, had a 260 wingspan, and would seat 606 passengers, while the stretch version was over 91 meters and had seating for at least 750 passengers. Does that sound cool to you? 😀
It’s on the list!
@@FoundAndExplained Sweet!
The 747 is still the queen of the skies
Amazing how two years can change things. the 787 has NOT crushed the A380 market, Airbus with its A350 still leads Boeing in time-appropriate aircraft, and the A380 while no longer in production, is being brought back by several airlines, to fill the need it was designed for. Predicting the future is a very dangerous pastime.
are you SURE youre not an aviation channel? Because i think I have fallen in love with those videos... and you :C
He is but his name isn’t actually xd
honestly loved your vid but each time i tried to watch it your voice made fall asleep before i could reach the end lolll
Even though the a380 was a commercial failure, the technology developed for it lives on in airbus' much more successful products. The A350 is by far my favourite plane flying at the minute!
Great video !!
I liked the exchange of two brown envelopes - hail Nick!
The a380 is a boondoggle, because they don't have the freighter version like the 747 8f. Some one recently ordered brand new 747 8f.
They had the A380F, but unlike the 747-F, the A380 can't swing it's nose open, thus extending the loading process and limiting the size of the cargo.
@@michaelbujaki2462 why didn’t they make the whole front section swing open (like the guppy I believe) or a rear ramp like the C5?
and then make all four engines reverse thrust
@@sirankleknocker3122 you'd have to ask Airbus.
Who ordered new 747s? Last I heard the assembly line is shutting down soon after the last one of the line which is happening spoils may have already happened.
@@michaelbujaki2462 because its a Airbus not Airtruck.
So Glad I was able to take a Couple Flights on One.🛫
I still think there's a market for it. The Hub and spoke model will always exist. You can increase point-to-point, but there's only so many flights you can have out of an airport like Heathrow. Eventually you'll have to increase the airplane size to popular regions. They should have made an A380 with composite folding wings, a smaller vertical stabilizer, new engines, and new Avionics/cabin etc. Maybe move the cockpit to the Second Story and make a nose door for cargo?
Even if it will never exist (what a shame), a special version of the A380-1000 will always be my dream. A GINORMOUS GOD of a plane with only 2 huge motors !!! The nice looking Boeing 777-10X would be 100% like "Ight, Imma Head Out" x'D
That being said, tbh if such a plane would be developed today almost from scratch (since we already have the final design), with all our current techs and a little bit beyond (2025-27, rather than old stone age 2000 techs), it really would be feasible quite easily. And even with difficulties, quite a chalenge would be awesome for the industry, the Concorde and A380 programs have brought SO MUCH innovations thanks to their developments.
The holy trinity combinason of New materials + IA generative design + 3D printing would greatly help in achieving such a marvel. Also a Massive use of carbon fiber would be welcome, since the A380 have almost no CF/composits in comparison with modern aircraft (23% in the A380, 53% in the A350 XWB). Around 80 would be great.
Then two ginormous RR Ultrafan or Open Rotor motors will lift this beast =)
0:10 did that thing just go lightspeed?
@Found and Explained; 8:10 12:27 please include metric unit measurements in your video.
It is said that the king of the skies did not rule for more than 10 years, but flying on one of those planes, especially with a Gulf airline, is a unique experience. The good news; Airbus learned a very valuable lesson from this adventure, how to be flexible and efficient and how to analyze the markets. Today, they have an extremely competitive replacement in the form of the A350, A321XLR and the A220 (kind of cheating, but they have it) as well as the "classical" models. Unfortunately, the glory days of the A380 double decker experience is over - except if you fly on few selected airlines.
The hub and spoke concept is self limiting due to the capacity of the hub airports - with growth, hubs will encounter real estate and operational limits, resulting in a limited number of flights and increasing ATC delays. Add to that the limited number of airports that can handle the A380 and it was questionable from the git go... Point to point makes more sense, and Boeing obviously made the right call when they scrapped their 747 follow on jumbo for the 787 that can operate at any airport served by jet transports...
An interesting addition to this video would be HOW Airbus planned to load and unload the A380F version...
If Airbus had brought the A380 to the market in the mid 1980's it may have had a long future.
Good video
3-5-3 seating seems like a nightmare. 2-5-2 on the 777 already sucks so much. I had to sit in the center seat from Rio to Miami and it was really terrible.
ive been in the a380 5 times now and find it the mosr comfortable for long flights
Interesting, at 5:19 the billboard backdrop moves one frame for every three frames that the text and overlays move, and it's extremely disconcerting. lol was this fixed/prevented in future videos?
I still think the a380 was a extremely successful project
Yes it was technologically but not economically since it was majorly built for business.
lots of old technology too.
They built it with the intention of making money, but failed to earn back the cost of development. Seeing aircraft being scrapped after as little as 10 years of service can hardly be called a success. There are hundreds of these aircraft and they have essentially no value...it’s costing the owners money to store them!
@@jacksons1010 They are only few hundreds. You are only looking at the cost and ownership of the A380 but you don't see what a marvel it is and what it means to the future of Airbus as a company. Yes it came late but Airbus realised it sooner and cut the cable on production even when airlines such as Emirates were still making orders on it. Before putting production to a halt after just a few hundred made, Airbus employed it's technology in the A350, one of the most, if not the most advanced passenger aircraft we have in the skies today.and will be used in future production aircraft to come without need of investing billions in R&D. That's would mean that the decades long of developing the A380 did not go to waste and that can be defined as success to Airbus.
@@mojamoja3962 You are engaging in pointless rationalization. The A380 failed in the marketplace, that’s an undeniable fact, and there is little technological commonality with the far superior A350.
Sad to say that the 747 has stopped production and this video is from when the A380 stopped 😢 so sad RIP queen and king
I still like the 747 better, Boeing will always be king of the skies! Great video.
bring back macdonalds douglas ;)
I do believe a lot of it was down to European pride and stubbornness. Airbus has long been a sign of unity in Europe, with each major plane section being manufactured in various countries before being assembled in France. It wants to be seen as a success whenever possible. Because the 747, an American plane, had long reigned the skies as the largest passenger aircraft, I personally think the EU and top brass at Airbus simply couldn’t resist the opportunity to one-up the US. Essentially a 1980’s vanity project that actually happened.
Don’t get me wrong, the A380 is one of my favourite planes and I’m definitely an Airbus guy. However, anybody looking at this in 1988 from a purely practical and responsible point of view wouldn’t have let this project happen in the first place. The EU governments were writing cheques out for Airbus left, right and centre to bankroll the A380 programme. Either Airbus forecasters displayed an incredible lack of foresight by putting all their chips on hub-and-spoke, or they knew what would happen but were overruled by management and politicians. Who knows.
Never mind all that. Let’s just enjoy this wonder of the skies while we can!
Great video btw!
Don't worry, Emirates convinced Airbus to bring up the brand-new A380neo.Maybe Airbus will work on it from 2020 to 2025 and focus on efficiency.I hope so.....
The A380 has no furture. Best to give it up. It's not a romantic decision but it's a logical one. Keeping the A380 around is absolutely stupid imo.
Here's one for the algorithm!
2:53 thats what she said 😂
Four Trent 972-84 engines have a total trust of 1427 kN, while three GE9X-105B1A engines have a total trust of 1467 kN. Would a trijet variant of A380 with the GE9X engines be more fuel efficient?
It likely would have been. But fuel efficiency wasn’t the only factor that led the A380s demise. The bigger factor was the shift of airlines away from the hub and spoke model. The A380 was not an easy plane for airlines to fill with passengers. And every empty seat really hurt the economics of justifying it.
I think Boeing better understood this dynamic because the airlines had been flying the 747 for several decades. A number of airlines used the 747 more for its range than seating capacity.
It’s not all bad news for Airbus. The 320 NEO and the recent 220 acquisition will serve the plane maker well for many years to come. Meanwhile Boeing still can’t figure out what it’s doing in that area.
@@jojr5145 What Boeing needs now is a fuel efficient 767 size plane build the same way as the 787, and at a low cost of development.
According to the animation at 1:00, 2020 is the new 2000.
Quality content
Yey A380 Garuda Indonesia on picture video
Well I am extremely sad to see how airlines are retiring A380 fleet due to the pandemic.😢😢😢😢
Despite I never had a ride on A380, but I am very much fascinated by this aircraft with B747. I love the aircraft because of its shape, size, & the design.
A380 is always a history making aircraft especially for an airliner like Emirates, Who never have signed an alliance, but became the largest operator of the aircraft & providing luxurious comfort across all the classes which other airlines do with the support of an alliance.
I really wish this pandemic to end soon & Airbus to start re-building more A380's for the next 3 decades.
It is hard to see Boeing Producing B747's since 51 years & they are still under production, while Airbus A380 just stopped production of A380 in just 18 years & all the operators are stuck with A380-800 while Boeing 747 have several variants startig from B747-SP to B747-8i.
Hopefully by next few decades, there will be more advanced aircrafts.
Well lets hope for the best😁😁😁😁
I wonder but, is if true that there was a proposition on Boeing and airbus would have worked together to make the largest plane in the 90s or is it just those internet fake news?
Most likely false
Prior to boeing buying MD it would have been a posibility. After its really impossible, it would be insanly illegal.
15:29 where you get this video?
The interesting thing is that with the limitations in slots at big airports the A380 and other big planes seem to become popular again, but no one produces these super large planes any more.
Somebody: the top-secret plane c-15 will be made in 2025
Government: oh well we can't make this now
The fused fuselage concept and the cloverleaf concept were ridiculous and would have never made it to market.
Fun fact: Boeing had full double deck jet idea long before Airbus did. While developing B747 design, they looked into a full double deck 747 concept.
@maverick aviation No they thought about it back in 60's while doing the initial development of the 747. There were several different configurations of double-decker designs studied. You can find models of Boeing double decker 747 studies done in 60's on google.
@maverick aviation Yes. That means Boeing thought of it first not Airbus.
Boeing didn't actually think of it first, and the 747 was not the first double deck aircraft to fly, the XC-99 actually holds that distinction, and it also proved the feasibility of such an aircraft. The knowledge gained by Convair, the USAF, and the aviation industry as a whole, laid the groundwork for the 747, C-5, and even the big Antonovs(124 and 225)
@@dankinusmc1 I said full double deck jet - jet. XC-99 is not a jet plus it wasn't the first double deck aircraft to fly either. Boeing C-97 Stratofreighter and Boeing 377 Stratocruiser flew before XC-99 did.
Unless I missed something when doing quick research on Google, XC-99 was the first large double deck aircraft designed from ground up to fly.
@@samwheat1302, you had it right, the XC-99 was designed specifically to be a full double deck aircraft, and like the B-36, there was a proposal to convert the design to all jet with a 35° wing sweep. But that aircraft proved the concept was valid to the sectors named, and spurred the development of heavy transporters for decades to come
I feel like saying they had the idea back in the 80’s is being a bit vague about what counts as the A380, I don’t think you can just count anything that fits the criteria of “what if airplane but huge?”
You should rename the channel to Found and Explaned
I really have thought of that! Haha
???
@@BenjaminKaiMaxwell Ex-plane-d
@@jsponson oh
yeah makes sense
@@FoundAndExplained Wait what was the old name again?
one of them with that being viable today
If it had reached the market 5-years sooner, it was predicted that it could have broken even, and had it entered the market 10 years earlier it would have turned a profit, even allowing for maybe 100 or so freghtets which would still be in yhe air today.
I loved it
If only the 2-2-2-2 could pass the wind tunnel and other accepted standards of aviation, that would be the best layout for a Premium Economy seat configuration .
It would be something!
Too many ads on this channel, great content though.
14:15
Yes the 747 😂
The A380 probably would have been the perfect rival to the 747, as well as the DC-10 and the Lockheed L-1011 if the A380 had been introduced in the early 1970's, the same time as the rest of these wide-bodies. By 2007, smaller, longer-range efficient twin-engine aircraft had been developed, which destroyed much of the spoke-and-hub model of long-range airline routes that the wide-body jets were made for.
"Was" a 747 rival, but not anymore. 747 is still the King Of The Skies
Queen of the skies
The 747 is also commercially dead, excepted as a cargo aircraft. The new 747 is the 777. The 747-8 passenger version didn't sell really well too, and the 400s are now mostly retired in passenger service
@@simonm1447 well as long as the 747 is still in service and a capable all around workhorse aircraft, not like the A380.
@@corolla9545 you can fly A 380 with Emirates (they plan to keep them until 2030) and with BA, even now at the moment. Emirates alone operates 123 380s, while 48 747-8 passenger jets have been built.
So both are still in service, but both are no longer offered by the manufacturers
An awesome aircraft, just built 20 years to late. Now it's going to the scrap yard faster than a Ford Fiesta.
Perfect 747 rival? Let's compare the lengths of time that both of them were in production 🤔
And the launch date. The 747 was pretty old when the A380 came out. Not much of an improvement considering it came 30 years later, and was designed using computers
As someone who works in the business it's always fun to see everyone's theories and opinions. Some are interesting thoughts; others are completely wrong and it's always fun 😊
im excited to see what boeing does for its next big aircraft. a 797, perhaps?
1:00 “by the year 2000” that is showing 2020, no hate just pointing it out
Imagine if 10-20 years ago we cleared regulatory hurdles for small modular nuclear reactors. And moved over to hydrogen for airplane engines. All the airports could have SMRs making cheap hydrogen fuel on site. It’s already a high security environment for concerns about theft of nuclear material. All the airplanes running co2 free with no produced co2 to transport fuel to the airports.
*imagine not have classes in planes*
The boiling 747 and concorde mixed together is call the bring 2707
Did anyone else hear him when he said triple "deckle"
dude, 1:25 what video is that?
2:06. "We have two videos on both of these planes..." So that's four videos? Correction: "We have videos on both of these planes..."
the perfect 747 rival! 😂😂😂 thats cute!!
Okay, so convert it to maximum seating - 1,000 or so - no first class or bars or sky suites. Replace three of your aircraft that hold 300 passengers with one A380 and use it from major city to major city: NYC to London; L.A. to Tokyo, Paris to Dallas. Wouldn't THAT work?
1:53 😳🤣. McDonnell Death Trap 12🤦🏻♀️
I guess you never read the article about how Boeing fooled Airbus into making the A380.
Link me!
Ha and Airbus fooled Boeing into cancelling the NMA and stretching the 737 instead of continued development on the more modern 757.
Who's the fool now?
@@HarmanatorNYC Actually, Boeing works with their customers and what they want. You know nothing but arrogance!
@@stevewallace1117 yep Boeing worked with Southwest to keep stretching the 737 and have the stretch need no pilot training.
They listened to their biggest customer at the expense of their reputation, shareholder value, balance sheet, mid term competitive position.
@@HarmanatorNYC You weren't there. You know diddly squat.
I think the reason why A380 wasn't that successfully as it could have been is because of its size. No matter how you put it as fuel cost per seat-mile; it consumes a lot of fuel while the industry is going for smaller, lighter and more efficiency air crafts such as the Dreamliner and A350's. And the market already had a giant, the 747, I think it never really was any need for something yet bigger and chunkier. Because unlike the slim outfit and design like the beautiful A350 and Dreamliner, the A380 is a truly big and chunky aircraft which could had a much better design indeed. I've got the feeling Airbus built that thing just because they could, and I believe that is the reason why it became so short lived.
The fuel consumption isn't that high (around 3 l per 100 km abs seat, on par with the 747-8), however it's not simple to sell enough seats because there are that much. 787 and A 350 consume around 2,5 l per seat and 100km, but they are simpler to fill because the seat capacity is lower, but still big enough for most routes.
At the end it was the inflexibility which was the biggest disadvantage of the 380
The A380 is such a comfortable aircraft it is a shame that they have closed down production. Why can't they make this plane with two bigger engines instead of four smaller ones ?
The four "smaller" engines are as big as anything else you'll find on the market. An engine of which two would be powerful enough to power an A380 just wouldn't be practical
bigger engines probably require greater ground clearance meaning the wings would need to be moved up on the fuselage or the landing gear extended or some combination. That is not easy or cheap to do without designing a completely new plane.
There is no engine big enough to get a twin jet out of the 380, even the huge GE-90 115 B or the GE9X are too small for that