Gimme a Dreamliner any day of the week.
The A380 is the most God-awful waste-of-space to ever roll off a production line. Well, unless you include the Shorts Skyvan....
Vidi, Vici, Veni. I saw, I conquered, I came.
don't hold back, titch, say what you mean ...
The "God-awful waste-of-space to ever roll off a production line" is quiet though.
The A380 wins hands down! Having had a tour of the A380 production line, that is one hell of a beast! Its like comparing a new Range Rover to a new mini. Yeah you'd have either but if it was a choice between the two the Range Rover would win!
787 anytime.....and my reasons ?
- Probably going to be a smoother ride (advanced gust alleviation technology)....no one likes CAT spilling their drink / breaking an ankle
- Low noise cabin
- Composite fuselage permit pressurization to 6000 ft equiv and can achieve higher humidity for comfort
- less annoying punters to share the sardine can with !
- Boeing is best !!
Although I take my hat off to the engineering feat Airbus has pulled off in getting a "whale" to fly....Seriously, I am awed by the accomplishment. That being said. I would not enjoy being trapped for 8+ hours with 500+ people rebreathing the same stale DRY air.
The Boeing folks got this one right and the innovations being put in place are absolutely groundbreaking. I get to fly point to point in an environment not seen in aviation, the air circulated will have some humidity and that will help the passengers feel more comfortable....I am glad to hear "(source is a secret)" that the target date and weights are back in line.
When you come right down to it size really isnt everything, Boeing decided to go smaller than Airbus and that is Definatly paying off...
I am sorry but the 787 is not even in the same league as the A380. I still cannot believe its been called a 'Dreamliner'! I am surprised they havent called it an 'Awesomeliner'! The term 'Dreamliner' could be used for say 'Concorde' but not an aircraft that is basically just something that is made of more composite materials than other aircraft! Plus its an ugly aircraft. I have always liked Boeing aircraft especially the 757 which is a great aircraft to fly in, but the 787 gets a thumbs down from me.
Anyone who thinks the 787 is ugly is crazy, and has no sense of style, or is an employee of Airbus.
Boeing 787, without a doubt in my mind.
Anyone that picks otherwise, doesn't know anything about the 787 and its advanced technologies; or is simply so biased, they'd pick an inferior product, because their own emotions refuse to suck it up and go for the superior product... which'd be sad. ;)
Some people here are living in a dream world! The 787 looks like it was a winning design from a Blue Peter under 5s "Design a plane for a new childrens cartoon"!
Also some people clearly arent aware of advanced technologies that are also on the A380. I suggest before people make comments about these aircraft they also read up on the A380 and not just the 787!
I think you are taking the comments too personally.....The question is which one...A380 or B787....the clear winner here is the 787...Just look at the order book...to be fair these two birds are in seperate catagories....The 787 order book shows that boeing long since has passed the break even point...because of the technologicaly superior product. Airbus chose to go BIGGER and it bit them in the buttthey are in the same boat as the concorde, It will not turn a profit. I think that eventually the A380 will become a freighter...Its just too big. I am surer that the A380 is innovative, but it will have too small of a market...even when they get the bugs worked out.
I do not understand why people would say the 787 is ugly, that makes no sense. this plane is more stremlined than any plane out there. I attended the roll out and haveing worked on it since its inception was personally awed by the actual site and touch of the real thing.
now as for the A350 that will be the Airbus answer for the 787...I say too little too late, by the time it comes out Boeing will have announced its next new plane and it will take market share frome the A320 types. I am proud to say that Boeing has gotten it right and will once again take back the #1 title.
Thanks to Airbus again for devoteing so much time and money to the A380 cause it only servrd to help Boeing retake the lead
ovurtym:Airbus chose to go BIGGER and it bit them in the butt
Ain't that the truth!
Victor is just upset because his beloved A380 has a front end that looks like the result of an intimate encounter between Frankenstein and a Weeble.... Not to worry, I'm sure that when Airbus get off their backsides and finally s-t-r-e-t-c-h that ugly airplane it'll look a little more in-proportion (as opposed to looking like a flying 'Mavis Cruet'***)
ovurtym:as for the A350 that will be the Airbus answer for the 787
By the time the A350 is actually fit for release, most of Boeing's Dreamliners will have been retired. I'm thinking along the lines of Thirty-odd years' time.
*** Kids, if you don't know who I'm referring to here, go and Google 'Willo The Wisp'.....
The question was which aircraft do people prefer. It wasnt a case of which one wins the most orders. It may have a smaller market than the 787 but that doesnt mean 787 is better. Concorde never made it because America couldn't accept that Britain/France could make such a plane work whereas they couldnt! As to it making profit British Airways did make profit from it. Alright it wasnt mega profit but they were in the end in the black with it. THe retirement of Conncorde was the first time that the commercial aviation industry took such a major backwards step.
Look at the nose of the 787 it is ugly!
By the way Goose i am pretty sure you have seen alot better videos than the 787 one!
The concorde never made it because the operational costs put the ticket prices out of reach for the flying publc. It was a very awesome jet but not economical, Boeing stopped designing theirs because the economics did not make sense...Not because they couldnt make it work.
The 787 has a beautiful streamlined nose, but I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I will not sit here and disrespect the A380 on looks but I would prefer to go point to point when I fly...in fact I always look for non-stop flights when I travel I cannot get that with the A380. Being in the aircraft mfg industry (Boeing) I do have a pretty good handle on most aspects of not only Boeing jets but Airbus as well.
I preffer the 787...Again cuddos to Airbus for the accomplishment (so far). But I might be biased cause....
If it aint Boeing....I aint going
Does the 78(oring)7 make you smile - I think not!
Every time I see the A380 fly I'm amazed at it's grace and power, and YES, it makes me smile.
The 787 may well have a few inovative features but let's see when it makes it to the market - hopefully Airbus will have some more meat to the A350 and will make hay while the sun shines.
Sad to see the last A300F picked up from Toulouse this week - personally I'd have kept the line open.
You've got to be kidding me. LOL! First off, Boeing was aiming for a mach THREE airliner (Boeing 2707)! They were in the midst of the project, when the US government saw the problems with sonic booms happening all over the place when the Concorde flew over. THAT'S why they banned it. Maybe try looking up facts before spouting stuff like that? ;)
Sonic booms are the reasons why the US refused to fund supersonic airliners. It's as simple as that. That's the only reason.
Go look up the North American XB-70, which was a mach 3 bomber concept. It did fly mach 3 for over half an hour in 1967. If we can do that, we can easily make a mach 2.5 to 2.7 airliner.
A Boeing 2707 worker was interviewed, saying mach 3 might've been too high. But mach 2.5 looked like it'd be very good, if the program continued.
Trust me, the US had and has the capability to build a Concorde-tpe airliner, with ease. That's just funny you think we can't. lol :)
P.S. The 787 is better than the A380 when it comes to new technology. Even someone from Airbus said the 787 is 5 years ahead of anything Airbus has out now. You'll have to live with the facts, not let your emotions blind you too much. There's a REASON why so many were bought. ;)
As chairman Mao said, regardless black or white cat, any cat can catch a mouse is a good cat. Same goes for 787 and 380.
"Does the 78(oring)7 make you smile - I think not!"
I think yes. When I think of flying at 6k feet instead of 8 (ever been to the mountains? Big difference). When I think of actual humidity in the air, powerful filters ensuring that the tuberculer cough in aisle 20 has less chance of reaching me in aisle 15. Also, when I think of NOT having to change planes to accommodate some asinine, environmentally evil hub-and-spoke system I am grinning from ear to ear. Dreamliner, ahhh.
B787. No question. How is the A380 a technological marvel? Other than it's size, what is the new technology. Where are the breakthroughs? Will it really provide more comfort for the traveler? Given the wiring issues and the time it will take them to solve them for good, one needs to worry about in service issues particularly with the first batch of aircraft. Down time is going to HUGE! At the end of the day, the cabins are all going to be somewhat similar and it will be a matter of what the airlines equip them with. Given that the seats are the same, one needs to consider factors such as cabin environment, air, ease of getting on and of the plane etc.
We have two unrelated animals here for 787 read A350 for A380 read 747-400 or series 8 see the 787 more of a re-placement for the series 777 which is 80s belt and braces technology. Airlines are currently ordering 777's as stop gap capacity for the next large civil transport, who's? Airbus or Boeing!!!! read on.....
The 747-8 despite Boeing protestations is very much still 70s technology with some embroidery and in the case of the 8 series two fuselage plugs, hardy ground breaking technology, with the exception of Lufthansa it's universal rejection by the all major carriers is spectacular.
For cabin quality noise & environment the 380 & 787 though not fighting for the same market are mammoth steps forward in technology terms, the next step will be demonstrated if we believe Airbus by the A350 and the learning curve they will get from Boeing's 787 introduction.
Ultimately the way air travel volume and slot availability is moving meand Boeing will respond to the A380 Airlines are asking them to do so & we will see the 747-400- & series 8 re-placed. Profitabiity of the 787 until the A350 arrives will enable Boeing to finance the development project.
Whilst the technology does not yet exist to make safe composite tubes to the A380 diameter or length construction/design will be similar to the approach taken by Airbus with the A350
It's difficult to see how Boeing can improve significantly on the A380 in it's own design so at this point the per mile cost and environmental advantages are seen as minimal or now existant, it's more about dropping the 777 in eight years approx and meeting airlines demands to Boeing for a large transport as an alternative to Airbus's A380
Which to choose, the larger cabin of the A380 makes for a more quiet, pleasant and stable flight, humidity levels claims for 787 personally I have never really thought about or suffered humidity problems on long haul, I'll go on plane on any route, the preffered choice as with A320 over 737 & 340 over 777 would be the A380 thanks....
We have two completely different animals here: for A380 we have no alternative for 787 we have the impending A350
For comfort space, quietness & environmental guru's theres nothing between the A380 as it has finally flown seems to have it, the 787 if to schedule will prove it's self in 2008
If we believe Airbus the A350 will benifit from the 787's development programe being six/seven years behind with 787 delivery slots tight unto 2013 this could well be a significant advantage. Similary a re-placement for the 747-400 embroidered over many years and it's now surfacing with a plugged fuselage in the 747-8 has with the exception of Lufthansa been a spectacular failure in terms of airline acceptability means Boeing has to move back into very large aircraft.
Growth in the industry demands a A380 alternative airlines are asking for it & despite Boeing's current public view on the market it will re-enter, entry be designed not only to compete with A380 but also seen as a re-placement the 777 with it's belt and braces 80's technology in approx eight years . Carbon fibre tubular construction of the type used in the 787 is not seen as the way to go so a solution similar to the A350 is viable for the Boeing larger fuselage diameter.
Currently technology means it's hard to improve over what Airbus has done with the A380 so Boeing alternative will be driven by engine technology more that fuselage construction materials.
A380 has flown finally, plaudits confirm it's quietness and smooth ride the space together with it's environmental credentials, the 787 is still to fly and the only advantage according to Boeing seems to be humidity levels, personally on short or long haul I have never suffered or thought about humidity so a question exists over the importance of Boeings humidity claims....
So for quiet and smooth ride with a large pleasant cabin I would plump for the A380 as I do given the choice for A320 over 737 and A340 over 777 all of which hold superior cabin experiences.