Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LOL, the A380 can actually carry more than 700 in an all economy config, though I believe they are almost all configured for mixed capacity in the 500s.
Actually, seeing the challenges the A380 has had with deliveries, plane issues, and only 1 sale in 2013 (50 to Emirates), if they make all their deliveries, and get just over 300 units, it would likely be considered a failure. Apparently Boeing's 747-8 sales have also been less than stellar (183 orders and deliveries).
It looks like the market for extra big passenger planes is pretty much full up right now.
LOL, the A380 can actually carry more than 700 in an all economy config, though I believe they are almost all configured for mixed capacity in the 500s.
Actually, seeing the challenges the A380 has had with deliveries, plane issues, and only 1 sale in 2013 (50 to Emirates), if they make all their deliveries, and get just over 300 units, it would likely be considered a failure. Apparently Boeing's 747-8 sales have also been less than stellar (183 orders and deliveries).
It looks like the market for extra big passenger planes is pretty much full up right now.
I'm not an airport hanger-on but have noticed that the vast majority of aircraft at McCarran here in Vegas is either 737s or aircraft of similar size and capacity.
Why do you care about the number of passengers/flight?
There are countless routes around the world that see thousands and thousands of passengers daily. Example: Las Vegas to Los Angeles - there are several dozens flights daily. Why do you care if those flights include one or two 700+ passenger flights? If the economics happen to work (and they obviously do for some routes, since as someone else has pointed out, the A380 has seating configurations in excess of 800 passengers on some legs), what's the problem?
The obvious fact is this - there is no problem.
I'm sure someone whined and complained when the 747 debuted: "Do we really need 400+ people on a flight?". Probably the same OMG-Change-Is-Scary! complaint was made way back when the first aircraft to seat 100+ came along.
I was on a 747 once that had some electrical problems. We pulled away from the gate about 50 yards and the power went off, the engines died. We sat there for at least an hour with no air conditioning. The guy I was sitting next to didn't believe in deodorant, apparently.
One of the reasons the Lockheed C5 transport was never turned into a civilian airliner, was because it was capable of carrying 600-plus people on multiple decks, every flight. And the baggage-hadling facilities at most airports couldn't have handled so many people demanding their bags all at once... especially when several of them arrived at the same time.
(Another reason was accelerated wear of the wing centersection, but that has nothing to do with this)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
