Virgin Delay on Airbus 380

Sorry Sandy but I completely disagree. The modification required to accept the A380 are just about exactly the same as the level required to take the 747 when it first appeared.

It will all get sorted out.

So far it is one airport of all those on the initial list that seems reluctant to complete the works needed. I’m sure there were similar teething problems when the 747 first entered service.

Actually no… most airports could handle it already. All the major international airports were already developed enough for the 747. Those that weren’t only needed small modifications.

I think its the expense and ulitimately the risk of investing in the modifications needed for the A380 that may stop many an airport from updating its facilities.

Today, the beancounters are in charge and beancounters don’t like taking risks

Airbus are famous for quoting incorrect figures. Many airlines have complained to them on this matter. Cathay Pacific was so p1ssed off at them for the quoting them a zero fuel weight and it was delivered it was over two tonnes heavier. This lead to the aircraft not being able to operate on the route it was bought for. They now have told airbus to shove the A380, which they were interested in, where the sun don’t shine.

I had heard this too.
I didn’t want to say anything because I couldn’t back it up.

But I guess its true, coming from a well respected employee of CX

It will all get sorted out.

So far it is one airport of all those on the initial list that seems reluctant to complete the works needed. I’m sure there were similar teething problems when the 747 first entered service.

Silver Snapper, my point exactly!!!!

But surely if any airport was to expand they would realize that there would be a bigger demand for spotters so would buid the facilities for them.

Tell BAA Scotland Andrew… 😡 They have boasted
multi-million improvements at their Scottish Airports but it seems these ‘improvements’ have seen the elimination of spectator facilities.. 😡

But surely if any airport was to expand they would realize that there would be a bigger demand for spotters so would buid the facilities for them.

how does that follow, unless you’re BAA management?

Surely if airports were too expand ,would they not close viewing facilities!!!! in order too expand.

Well, the Aircraft is already reported as over weight… and its not even in once piece yet.

Lets wait and see I say. Time is the only thing that will tell

Airbus are famous for quoting incorrect figures. Many airlines have complained to them on this matter. Cathay Pacific was so p1ssed off at them for the quoting them a zero fuel weight and it was delivered it was over two tonnes heavier. This lead to the aircraft not being able to operate on the route it was bought for. They now have told airbus to shove the A380, which they were interested in, where the sun don’t shine.

Almost every major airport is able of handling the A380, by parking it on a remote place. Boarding the aircraft would take ages, however.

Wrong, so wrong.

Heathrow, handling countless 747 movements each day is having to upgrade its taxiways for the A380. I think the also need to upgrade the runways too, not sure about that.

Many Major airports will need similar modifications.

Parking an A380 on a remote stand is simply not a solution.

Almost every major airport is able of handling the A380, by parking it on a remote place. Boarding the aircraft would take ages, however.

Personally I think that is a silly idea, the A380 is a huge aircraft and doing it the way you said is not very economical plus not to mention the amount of time it would take,

They are going to have to pass through 2 jetways either way, Dartie. How is walking through 1 jetway and down 1 stairs into a bus any more timeconsuming then walking out of 1 or 2 jetways?

plus i dont think VS want to spend money on parking in and getting passengers and their luggage plus cargo being moved to the terminal!

Uh, ok. So basically, every airline that serves Bradley (about 90% of the International airlines serving LAX at that) that has to park in the remote terminal when the 13 main gates are full, want to spend this money you’re referring to, but Virgin doesn’t? That is what you are leading me to believe here.

How dare they blame LAX! 😮 Currently, Virgin utilize Terminal 2 @ LAX along with NW, NZ, AC, and KL. Let’s say none of the existing 9 main terminals are retrofitted, the A380 will surely be accomodated at the Bradley remote terminal on the far west end of the airport. If anything, they would just park the A380’s out there and bus them to T2 as opposed to Bradley like the rest of the planes parked at the remote terminal have done to them. Again, this is assuming that they don’t retrofit (which I’m sure they will eventually) any of the 9 main terminal buildings.

Personally I think that is a silly idea, the A380 is a huge aircraft and doing it the way you said is not very economical plus not to mention the amount of time it would take, plus i dont think VS want to spend money on parking in and getting passengers and their luggage plus cargo being moved to the terminal!

Btw afaik Munich is the first European airport ready to handle the 380.

I’m assuming this is due to the new Star Alliance terminal?

Well, the Aircraft is already reported as over weight… and its not even in once piece yet.

Lets wait and see I say. Time is the only thing that will tell

The load per wheel isn’t so much higher than let’s say of a B777-300ER. There was a comparison in Flight International a couple of weeks ago, don’t have it handy now.

Btw afaik Munich is the first European airport ready to handle the 380.

Well, its could turn out just that.
If so, Airbus are finished.

Perhaps

But with the Industry as it is today “Don’t spend money unless its critical” there will be plenty people to vote no for expansion of current airport facilities

So it’s looking like Airbus have found it’s Concorde replacement already, i.e. a plane that can only operate between certain niche airports. :confused: