Nickname: SOZOMAN

Review: EVERYBODY SEEMS TO BE IGNORING THE REAL PROBLEM WITH THE AIRBUS...NAMELY WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO LAND THAT ALBATROSS? IT'S TO DAMN BIG! HOW MANY BILLIONS WILL HAVE TO BE SPENT TO ACCOMODATE THAT BIG B.U.F.F. BOING HAS A WINNER....AGAIN!

Date reviewed: May 14, 2007 6:11 AM

Nickname: William

Review: When I first saw a bow shot of the A380, I thought it looked like a Klingon Warship. The Enterprise the A380 ain't. Well done Boeing.

Date reviewed: Dec 22, 2006 8:22 PM

Nickname: aircraftbuff

Review: The new 747-8 can carry 567 passengers, has a range of 8,000 miles, has 20% lower trip costs while maintaining a seat-mile cost less than the A380. It is cheaper, more sensible, and more fuel efficient. Airbus is in trouble.

Date reviewed: Dec 6, 2006 11:41 AM

Nickname: Appeal2

Review: Bias is always in the eye of the beholder. Fact is, the A380 will probably never make any money if the true development costs plus compensation claims by customers for delivery delays are factored in. In fact, if Pan-European nationalism wasn't riding on the plane and market forces were allowed to work, the A380 would have been canceled. Let's not forget that Boeing did the market research and found that development costs were too high and demand to low ever to justify developing a 380-class aircraft. Therefore, they opted for the 787 and the rest is history. Everyone takes Airbus' claim of wiring problems at face value. But no specifics have ever been provided. In addition, by its own admission, the 380 is 5.5 tons over weight. There goes that operating expense advantage. Finally, there are the wake turbulence effects of the 380. Recent reports say it will require double the space of 747 to avoid making planes flying too close break apart in flight. Airbus is airbust!

Date reviewed: Dec 6, 2006 2:50 AM

Nickname: Anlauf

Review: It is interesting to read this article. With the A380 wiring issues in full view, and no 747-8 passenger models sold to date, the situation is not so very clear. Perhaps the storyline was missed; the competition is not at the 450+ seat level, but at the 250-350 level... and with point-to-point flight rather than hub destinations. In 2006, the story was the commercial success of the new Boeing 787 and the continued success of the old standards; the A320/19/21 and the 737-700/800.

Date reviewed: Nov 29, 2006 2:25 AM

Nickname: skywatcher

Review: What an appalling article by a magazine I used to read and trust. I was shocked to read such biased, flag waving nonsense from quality journalists. You defeat any valid points you may have had in your article with your anti-European bias. The truth is more complex than you relate and your conclusions based on flawed statistics (courtesy of the Boeing press department for the gullible perhaps?). I have no axe to grind, just an avid interest in and love of the aerospace industry. I also love balanced journalism, and thought you guys did too. May both aircraft prosper, for the good of competition and us all.

Date reviewed: Feb 16, 2006 7:18 PM

Nickname: Tomcat

Review: Okay, all Airbus did was say hey, why don't we make a bigger 747. Read the falowing facts: 747-400 range=roughly 6,828 mile. Passengers=certified up to 490 may vary over 500 on single class layouts. Engines vary. A380 Passengers=555-range=about 8,000 miles. All Boeing has to do is extend their 747-400, which will basically be the 400x and upgrade electronics. They can get more fuel efficient engines such as the ones from the 777 which can hold about the same amount as the a380.

Date reviewed: Feb 3, 2006 10:40 PM

Nickname: Nate

Review: A380 is larger and a new airframe. The A380 is still a traditional commercial aircraft design (it is not the first aircraft with two full decks). The efficiency of the A380 comes mainly from its wing engines. The 747-8 will have an even newer wing and GEnx engines. The 747-8 has a definite advantage in versatility. I do not know where people are getting information that says the A380 needs less runway than the 747. (Do you have the AFM/POH?). Airbus? Airport planning manual says that the A380 will need about 14,000 feet (sea level standard day). Good luck seeing three mile long runways at more than a few airports. The 747-8 needs less than 11,000 feet of runway according to Boeing's airport planning manual. Versatility is not just a marketing tactic by Boeing. Don't forget that the 747-8 borrows cabin design features from the 777, which is requested by passengers and preferred over the A330/A340 series.

Date reviewed: Jan 28, 2006 9:27 PM

Nickname: LVRob

Review: As a 747 fan, I see two biases for Boeing and for Airbus. Just like anything, the A380 has to go through some growing pains just like the 747 did when it was introduced. I am sure the A380 will do fine after a while. The thing about Boeing is they have dominated the market for so long, they get lazy about the competition. It takes Airbus to give them a reality check to be alert again. With two aircraft manufacturers offering competitive products, it is good to have competition since Boeing had monopolized the commercial market for a while. It is nice for the airlines to have choices, and competition drives development of new products. As for travel comfort and all, I have flown on both Boeing and Airbus products. After 12 to 15 hours of travel time, cruising at about the same speed, it made no difference. The best comfort in traveling is point to point such as teleportation. For Airbus, great job, and for Boeing, be more alert in the future if you want to stay at the top.

Date reviewed: Dec 16, 2005 6:59 PM