The A380 too small?! Time for a 3-story Boeing 747! It would have 2 full-length decks and a 3rd partial-length deck to preserve the iconic Boeing 747 hump.
It had potential but they killed it the day it came out. They literally didnt give any airlines what they wanted like emirates asked for better engines so they said no and after that bam gone
What potential ? Gas guzzling ,expensive to operate , confined too few airports , operated less than capacity. It was a vanity project. Poorly. Conceived.
Samuel Maltry if it came out in the 80/90s, it would either have been the “King of the Skys” (as to the 747s Queen of the Skys) flying along side 747 or killed off by the 747...
Former Airbus engineer here who had the honour of working on this aircraft - Video was overall accurate, but for the -800F it was doomed as soon as the chief engineers placed the cockpit on the lower level, so the nose can't "open" for oversized cargo. Also, I believe that standard cargo pallets wouldn't have fit efficiently on one of the decks, so the 747F had many of advantages. Can't say much else, but it's definitely sad to see this beautiful aircraft end production, if only it came earlier things might've been much different.
It says the wing was designed for a larger version of the plane. Does that mean all the current A380's are flying around carrying unnecessary weight and bulk?
I agree with you it's too sad to see this beautiful aircraft end production but there is one last chance that can keep continuing production, why they don't transform it to a triple reactor like the md-11, dc-10, it could the ideal solution, it can reduce the weight aircraft, fuel consumption, by reducing the weight the number of the airport who can land on will be increased maybe they will loss 50 seats but It can be the good solution for airbus and airlines
n40798 Yes I’d say so. I doubt there are many flights if any that take a full fuel load. So they should have started with the stretch! But I think if they rebuilt it will new engines and carbon fuselage and wings would it have made it?!
Crude Rude What I believe you’re mentioning is that different parts were designed with two different versions of the same CAD software. And, the cable cornering was slightly different between them. Computer manufacturer or what Operating system they were running was totally irrelevant.
@@karldunne5595 last long haul I did was China Southern Toronto, Shanghai, Auckland. They were pretty good and not a budget airline at all, even though the price was very good. Much better than Delta. Singapore Airlines is still the best I have flown, but were quite a bit more pricey. China Southern was at least on par with Cathay Pacific. it was a 777. All the flying I did having worked at sea thru two decades and somehow never got to fly a A380.
You haven't tried 777 300 er first class , it's the quietest and the most comfortable airplane imo. I have logged in a lot of clock travelling with the 777 and I'm loving it
@Adrian Pitschel Tough to say how long the 747-8Is will keep flying once the 777X starts entering airline fleets, especially now with the Coronavirus hit. If Lufthansa can't completely fill their 747s, they'll retire them for 777Xs earlier than originally planned.
The stretch would have made a much more graceful looking aircraft. I always thought the wings looked disproportionately large so this explanation was interesting. The 747 was a purpose-built freighter with its nose cargo door. Is that a factor in its favor too?
A380s simply have too high a dead weight...unless the cargo carrying capacity of the aircraft increased proportionally to the increased dead-weight over the 747, it wouldn't stack up. To put it in perspective, the 747-8F carries 140 tonnes of payload over a dead weight of 220 tonnes. The plane can basically carry close to 70% of its empty weight as payload. The A380-800F proposed a payload of 150 tonnes, but with a dry/empty weight of 280 tonnes. So it could only carry a bit over 50% of its empty weight as payload. As for the nose door, I would think for airlines that operate large/specialised freight, the nose door is a big selling point. The market for those planes in itself is a niche though. Only the 747-400F has that option, the newer 747-8 doesn't.
@@AeroDr The 747-8F is the only in-production commercial cargo aircraft with a nose door. All 747 freighter variants have been available with a nose door.
I always suspected the A380 wing was designed with a stretched version in mind - they've been lugging that huge wing around for years now, incurring huge extra fuel costs. No prospect of a stretched version, so A380 is uneconomic and dead in the water.
But the problem with a380 as a cargo plane is that there is not a big door for cargo to go in. The 747 have a nose cargo door that can make use of the huge cargo space
Tiger Boy That’s actually not a big issue. It’s rarely used and not an option on the passenger converted aircraft that make up majorly of the 847 cargo fleet. The 380 was just to heavy relative to cargo volume
Then the cargo door would be smaller than the 747f, the weight will increase causing higher ticket prices due to fuel needed, and passenger capacity will be smaller than the 747
I've flown on the A-380 several times from Los Angeles to China and also to South Korea. Hands down the roomiest, and most comfortable ✈ I've ever flown on, and very quiet also.
I would have really loved to have seen the ‘stretched’ version in production. It would have been a glorious super beast! That most likely would have seen Boeing offer its ultimate proposal of the 747. As a confessed ‘airframe junkie’, it would have been a fantastic!
i worked in broughton and was on the 380 in the early days and we did have the wing panels made for the freighter version but it was removed from the jig before the wing was complete
gbin21 not that much. The stringers, which run along the panels inboard to outboard where a lot chunkier. Maybe there was more variation later in the build but we didn’t see it as it was scrapped
I would have liked to have seen an a380 supertanker. This used like the 747 supertanker role of fighting fires from above. It seems the retiring aircraft may be good for this role.
Andrew Day Not at all. Clearly you don’t understand aviation and that they are very different airframes designed in different eras for different purposes
Andrew Day I’m fully aware of that. Again you’re not understanding why the 747 could’ be converted to either a cargo hauler or tanker and the 380 cannot be. Do your research as to why that’s true
I also think the A380 will return. But only when e.g. Rolls Royce manages to build an engine that is stronger than the GE9X engine. So maybe around 2025 or 2030 something like this could happen. So an A380 with 2 engines could really be very economical. They would certainly call it A370 or A390. The engine would then have to be easily 700-900 kilo Newtons. So 30-50%. With new winglets, the A380 would easily be 50% more economical. An "Ultra Long Range" variant would then not have to exist, because the A380Neo (or as it is called) then easily has a range of over 20,000 kilometers. Possibly even 20,000-22,000km. So you could also profitably find a route between e.g. Create LHR-SDY and also FRA -SYD .. So nonstop flights between Europe and Australia. Emirates, Singapore Airlines, British Airways, Lufthansa and many more would then also be interested in such aircraft. Something like that would be very great. But it is 50-50 whether they will do a refresh, which will also be profitable
@@jul1anuhd You wouldn't want to build that much fuel capacity into the plane outright. You'll pay for it in operating empty weight and in maximum takeoff weight. Only a very few airlines would want/need that range, namely Air New Zealand and potentially Brazilian or Chinese carriers wanting to make that run. The 18,000km range of the A350-900ULR and presumably the -1000ULR as well is about the maximum you need to connect any two potential airports. Only Auckland to London, China+Korea+Vietnam to South America, and a few very obscure, probably super low demand routes are longer than 18,000km. For those routes, it's probably better to just have the option to put in an auxiliary fuel tank for those select customers/frames and otherwise just save on OEW and MTOW.
Yep i reckon get rid of the suites,bar,shower,business class. Make it purely a low cost short hauler for the uk europe holiday market. Easyjet and jetstar should buy them uo
I’ve flown on the 787, 777, 747, 737, A320, A330, A350 and the A380 as well as various other manufacturers planes and the A380 was the quietest and the smoothest landing of them all - I was amazed as I’m a Boeing guy.
That stretched A380 would have been a sight to behold. It would have then been the largest commercial air Liner ever to fly in EVERY respect, cause the 747-8 is just a little longer than the base model A380
As far as I know (maybe I am wrong) the floor the 2nd deck is a structural part of the fuselage, and it cannot be removed to make one big cargo compartment - that's one reason the 747 is just a better freighter platform, second is the weight (as stated in the video) and third is the fact the 747 has an elevated pilot cabin over the nosecone, so the nosecone can be converted to a huge cargo loading bay which allows you to load that matches the size of the cargo compartment (so in theory you coud load a gigantic almost a plane long long piece of anything that is almost as wide and tall in width and height while the side cargo doors only fit smaller stuff). BTW interesting video.
as much as I love Boeing aircraft, the Airbus 380 is just amazing! Got to fly in one for the first time last year on our trips to and from France. Totally amazing!
This is so sad, built as a platform for future modules with the future and expandability in mind. But including all that made it too expensive and uncompetitive, so instead we get another 737 version rushed out and designed to save Boeing as much money as possible.
It is also important to point out that the Nose of the 747F can lift to allow bigger stuff in, and if you kept the 2nd floor on the A380 (which i think was a design requirement for structural stability of the fuselage) you would then need specialized loaders that could reach the 2nd floor or an internal elevator system which would be a maintenance nightmare.
I would wan to see the Plus version. Looks like it could've maybe had about 5 more years of life if it was lucky. But unfortunately, there's no more chances today. Airbus has already made its final desicion to discontinue the production this year. Sad to say goddbye a such a big bird that only had a life around 14 years.
The A380- Combi... Definitely. Maybe the least glamourous of the three, but certainly the most useful (especially in these times of reduced air travel, and thus cargo space), but also because it could make a lot of economic and environmental sense.
I would've liked to see the A380 freight, but hearing about the OEM issues, well... Nevermind. Maybe an A380 Freight Stretch would've been interesting? Probably not...
I think Airbus should have pursued a combination passenger freighter variants. Because most Freight delivery companies mostly buy Secondhand aircraft. That would also improve the marketability of the A380.
Its a shame that the A380 variants never came out. I thought the plus was a good idea. Those winglets made the A380 look better than the current one than the 800. but that is just my opinion. I think the bigger problem is the engine not being that economic enough especially when compared with the A350 and B787. Fuel prices increasing was no help either. I think Airbus should have worked more with more fuel efficient engines and fuel saving designs. If they could have made the A380 as fuel efficient as an A350, than it may have had a chance to survive.
TheTriplc Even if they were free, operators would soon be running at a loss. Hourly operating costs are staggering, maintenance costs are huge, fuel burn is just too high per passenger, and the break-even point (passenger occupancy per flight) also mitigated against the long-term profitability of the A380. Emirates was the ONLY operator able to make the A380 work financially, and that’s because there were a set of specific reasons/circumstances not available to any other operator of the A380. The location of their hub allowed the break-up of extra-long range routes into shorter, more fuel-efficient flights (longer flights require more fuel load, which adds to weight, which adds to fuel burn, which adds to cost & break-even point). They ordered enough of the type (almost 100, I think?) that the per-unit cost was significantly lower than any other operator paid for theirs. This large fleet brought other economies of scale; they were able to bring maintenance in-house, reducing operating costs dramatically compared to other operators, and they were also able to buy parts in volume, assuring further reductions of the per-unit prices (probably also receiving further discounts from Airbus & other vendors), and reducing down time of aircraft needing parts/maintenance (and the A380 is certainly maintenance/labor intensive as compared to other aircraft) by having a huge inventory of spares/consumables. Having such a large fleet also allowed large savings for training aircrew/ground crew, which are substantial. The price of fuel is also lower for Emirates than many other operators. Still, I believe Emirates cancelled what was their last order for the A380, which may have been the last production order for the aircraft. As they don’t keep flying planes past a certain age/flight hours, some of their older A380s have been, and the rest of the fleet will be retired as they age out until they are no longer in service with Emirates. The second-hand market prices for the A380 (hell- for just about any commercial aircraft right now due to the Covid-19 related slump in air transport!) are pretty weak, because of the operating costs. I wonder if the current low valuation of the A380 and the current low price of oil might attract a low-cost carrier to try and pick some up at relatively “bargain” prices for specific routes in anticipation of air transport returning to “normal” after travel restrictions are lifted? But I have a feeling that this crisis will be with us for some time, and will continue to negatively impact the air transport industry for even longer. If that is the case, will more carriers start to remove less profitable/unprofitable aircraft such as the A380 from their inventories sooner rather than later? I wonder who will be the last operator of the A380, and if we will be surprised by just how soon it will disappear from the skies? Is this inevitable, or will something save this ambitious plane from an early extinction? Was the A380 simply too much, too late?
I heard that the airplane had a lot of technical and maintenance issues, at least at the start. I don't know if that has continued. But, you don't want a plane that has to be in the hangar for fixes too much of the time. Boeing spent far less on 747-800 upgrade. They didn't sell a lot of the passenger version, but the freighter variant sold relatively well. Total sales for 747-800 have been 154. A380 sales were only 251. Not very many given the enormous cost of developing the brand new plane. Having the cockpit on the lower level really hurt the A380F, making it much harder to load pallets. You can open the 747F nose and slide in cargo very easily.
I have a question. I have a 1/400TH Gemini Jets A380 Fedex plane. This video says they where not produced. Did I misunderstand? I’m confused now. They usually only make real livery models.
747-8 freighter also has the benefit of opening up the whole front for easier/faster loading and extra-large cargo space. It would have been cool to see how big the airplanes could have been constructed if it was economical for airlines. 1000 passengers on one plane would have been cool
You say that improvements on a neo version may have included new engines. Neo in Airbus-speak means new engine option. So I’m guessing that’s the only essential part of a neo version. That’s why the improved cabin version as called ‘plus’: no new engines...
"Improved cabin" really was just about squeezing in an eleventh seat per row. If you think a 737 seat is cramped, these 11-abreast birds would have been much worse.
Great video, however one or two errors, production delays in 1996 killed the freighter? A380 was still on the drawing board in 96. 2006 is more likely.
I did think that stretching the A380 was pushing the envelope a bit. I was looking forward to the launch of the A380Plus, but those planes were sadly not meant to be... oh well
I would’ve loved to see ALL the A380s. It’s such a good aircraft. Travelling in one is so comfortable and it is so pretty... it’s a shame it’s doing away :(
When you compare the A380 to the 747-8 and 777X, you really see how enormously heavy those wings are on it, due to them being designed for a longer A380. That's one of the reasons that killed the A380-800.
Sadly even the reigning champions of the skies the 747s are being retired after the -8 series ends production eh. I hope to get to fly on one of the -8ICs one day before theyre gone.
Genuinely gutted that the A380 failed. I make a point of flying on it whenever it’s possible. Often routes from London to Asia. It’s such a smooth and quiet ride and a beautiful aircraft to see at the gate too. Not to mention watching them take off and land. Definitely my fav plane to fly on. She’ll be around for another decade or so but once they’re all retired it’ll be a sad day. Much like the end of Concorde.
2:15, there was an error about the calcul of the empty weight 610 000 pounds - 485 000 p= 125 000 p 125 000 pounds x 0.454 kg = 56 750 kg or 56.7 tons less NOT 86 ton less
The original proposal for the A380 called for 1,000 seats. However, no airport would have had the infrastructure, terminals, etc, to accommodate it. Airbus at one point proposed folding wings like aircraft carrier planes to make it happen.
They could have put double folding winglets like the 777x on the A380 plus. Also the A380 freighter would have looked nice and carry larger things across the globe
it's ahead of its time, or maybe it was walking the limits of human connectivity. Its one impressive piece of machinery that will always catch the eye of the traveller's.
ETOPS and the massive efficiency of newer long range twinjets destroyed the A380's chances of success (and the passenger 747s probably aren't long for this world either for the same reasons), but it's a shame because watching these behemoths take off and land is something special.
Yeah they're insane. There was an extreme rare case when there where 2 Emirates A380 on the ground in Zurich due delays. Seeing both of them next to each other on that Airport looked so rediculous.
I still believe they could make it work, especially the A380 Stretch if they'd focus more heavily on marketing to primarily Southeast Asian Airlines, and even more so on Chinese Airlines. It's the PERFECT market for it, and, almost exactly matching to that of demand and general Chinese Business mentalities that are present and constant there. The question would not so much be that of viability of the sales potential of the product, but rather, their PR & Marketing strategies and focuses while selling it. They require a very niche and specific set of tactics, keywords and examples to properly excite and appeal to the Chinese marketplace, while also creating a large amount of confidence in the planes to the extent it'd likely result in rather quick commitments to orders for it. The Combi also is one that would still have a good-great opportunity to make a decent-good amount of sales, though, the marketing success and focuses would be far more global than that of the stretch, and, in itself, be one of the more tougher to figure out the strategies to use in each market in their attempts to make confident sales. The American market in regards to passenger fill on most flights within the US, and North America as a whole, is far more unpredictable and hit or miss than the other markets for flights in the rest of the world for sure. This of course made for the incredibly tough sell to airlines here in the US of any A380 Variants. The bigger the aircraft, the more squirrely the prospects of having them gets here. It's just never been that viable of an option here. And the US is the world's biggest airline market by far in terms of total passengers and flights in a single nation. Yet it's always been an unpredictable beast for consistency on passenger fill on any flights at all. Sometimes you'll get a fill to capacity, other times 3/4 fill and then the next day you'll find yourself averaging a suddenly low of 1/4-1/2 filled flights without warning or explanation. Then a week later, and you're back to being unable to have any more ticket sales on the route due to a consistent fill to capacity on it that winds up lasting for 3 weeks before going back to low fills yet again. That's again, simply not at all viable for large aircraft, as they need and require a confidence in knowing the route it will serve will consistently have 3/4-100% fill each flight in order to then cover the costs of the craft and make it profitable. And of course the last major bit that made these wonderful works of art nonviable here in the US market is simply that it came in too late in regards to marketing and production, and, with the way our transportation systems and airports work here, you were not going to convince the taxpayers nor government to expand airports around the nation to fit these behemoths. From the get go here it was blatant that only a very select few, likely only as many as you'd be able to count on one hand, would actually go through with the necessary changes & expansions necessary to accommodate them. And low and behold, that sentiment was correct. If I recall correctly the US only has 6 or 7 that ever did so. It is incredibly sad however as these aircraft are truly works of art and are incredibly legendary in my books. I wish they would have came in at the optimal time, and our government did not operate as it does when it comes to transportation thus instead encouraging the expansions of as many airports here as possible to accommodate the A380, so that we could have seen many more and a far longer lifespan to these aircraft in use.
As AIRBUS has suggested it can easily tweek the A380 in a great many ways, like any manufacture in any industry it really does depends on customer & future market trends to dictate projects! The A380 will just be GRYOED & VOLTED by AIRBUS for a future project.
All you have to do is make the aircraft squat like a C5 or a C130 does for loading. Good luck with that. Converting a passenger aircraft into a freighter is more involved than just installing a large cargo door. There’s the inside support structure that holds the floor and pallets. The vast majority of freighter aircraft are aircraft of Boeing design due to the design philosophy of the company. Designing for secondary use after passenger retirement gives Boeing a huge advantage.
Customers think the a380 is too small. Offers bigger a380. No orders.
Exactly, no idea where they got this information from!
Ikr 😆
Malo Noiville emirates pushed airbus for the a380 plus or larger a380’s
The A380 too small?! Time for a 3-story Boeing 747! It would have 2 full-length decks and a 3rd partial-length deck to preserve the iconic Boeing 747 hump.
Greeeeeed
why was it not called the A3-freighty
I dont know if I hate it or love it.
I would've order it just for the name hahahahhaha
Hahahaha X,D
Ewan Reynolds Why not the A3FR80.
@@perlamiseriaccia Or the A3XXL ;)
The a380 had so much potential, it would have been amazing to see in the 80s and 90s when quad jets were more popular
Samuel Maltry yeah
It had potential but they killed it the day it came out. They literally didnt give any airlines what they wanted like emirates asked for better engines so they said no and after that bam gone
Yeah man oil industryaking things difficult
What potential ?
Gas guzzling ,expensive to operate , confined too few airports , operated less than capacity.
It was a vanity project. Poorly. Conceived.
Samuel Maltry if it came out in the 80/90s, it would either have been the “King of the Skys” (as to the 747s Queen of the Skys) flying along side 747 or killed off by the 747...
Former Airbus engineer here who had the honour of working on this aircraft - Video was overall accurate, but for the -800F it was doomed as soon as the chief engineers placed the cockpit on the lower level, so the nose can't "open" for oversized cargo. Also, I believe that standard cargo pallets wouldn't have fit efficiently on one of the decks, so the 747F had many of advantages.
Can't say much else, but it's definitely sad to see this beautiful aircraft end production, if only it came earlier things might've been much different.
Was there any drawings of the 380 with the cockpit in the upper level? That would be interesting to see.
It says the wing was designed for a larger version of the plane. Does that mean all the current A380's are flying around carrying unnecessary weight and bulk?
I agree with you it's too sad to see this beautiful aircraft end production but there is one last chance that can keep continuing production, why they don't transform it to a triple reactor like the md-11, dc-10, it could the ideal solution, it can reduce the weight aircraft, fuel consumption, by reducing the weight the number of the airport who can land on will be increased maybe they will loss 50 seats but It can be the good solution for airbus and airlines
n40798 Yes I’d say so. I doubt there are many flights if any that take a full fuel load. So they should have started with the stretch! But I think if they rebuilt it will new engines and carbon fuselage and wings would it have made it?!
Seems you guys had alot Tolouse.
:/
I'll jump off this bridge now.
2:24 "Production delays in 1996??" It was production delays in 2006...
Crude Rude
What I believe you’re mentioning is that different parts were designed with two different versions of the same CAD software.
And, the cable cornering was slightly different between them.
Computer manufacturer or what Operating system they were running was totally irrelevant.
Correct
@@cruderude4419 What's a Macawleandough?
Don't forget the triple-decker A390 Airbus created for an april fools joke once. It even had an onboard pool and everything =P
Emirates would probably really have considered buying them 😂
Tahiti looks nice!!...... 👍 😍
AK Max Flights & Travel emirates would steal the entire stock
A390? Wasn't it called the APR001?
Airbus: Attaches wings and jet engine to cruise ship
I love the A-380, I’ve made several trip to Sydney on Qantas and Paris on Air France and it the quietest and most comfortable plane I’ve ever flown.
China southern business class A380!!!!!!............................. 👍 😍.
@@karldunne5595 last long haul I did was China Southern Toronto, Shanghai, Auckland. They were pretty good and not a budget airline at all, even though the price was very good. Much better than Delta. Singapore Airlines is still the best I have flown, but were quite a bit more pricey. China Southern was at least on par with Cathay Pacific. it was a 777. All the flying I did having worked at sea thru two decades and somehow never got to fly a A380.
You haven't tried 777 300 er first class , it's the quietest and the most comfortable airplane imo. I have logged in a lot of clock travelling with the 777 and I'm loving it
Both are amazingly wonderful experiences for passengers.
SO TRUE Pax will miss it
In some years we are going to have only twinjets...
dikel18 in the passenger market we are already mostly there.
In 5 years the a380 will likely be the only 4 engined passenger jet flying.
@Adrian Pitschel Tough to say how long the 747-8Is will keep flying once the 777X starts entering airline fleets, especially now with the Coronavirus hit. If Lufthansa can't completely fill their 747s, they'll retire them for 777Xs earlier than originally planned.
At least the future of the 747 is looking good with cargo operations
not if the U.S. Dumbocraps and Global Climate change idiots have their way. We’ll be flying in pedal or rubberband powered planes.
Imagine trying to board 900 passengers
Aircraft carriers: thats cute
Then the A380 would be like boarding a carnival cruise ship 😉
Hence why it stop production....
JS I used to work as a ramp agent and 200+ are already a pain in the ass -.-
This post was made by the a380 gang
i am gonna start a LCC and buy old a380, fill it with economy seats and make it work...
Ok but where u gonna get da money for
The gates
The planes
The offices
The employees
The maintenance cost
The fuel cost
blah blah blah
6:25 RIP Landing Gear
KVNL OOF
Klm *asia*
*sending planes to the land that is not from asia*
The stretch would have made a much more graceful looking aircraft. I always thought the wings looked disproportionately large so this explanation was interesting.
The 747 was a purpose-built freighter with its nose cargo door. Is that a factor in its favor too?
So current airlines are carrying around too much wing. And thus paying a higher cost than they should. No wonder it didn't work well economically.
Well they might be too expensive for them to operate it.
A380s simply have too high a dead weight...unless the cargo carrying capacity of the aircraft increased proportionally to the increased dead-weight over the 747, it wouldn't stack up.
To put it in perspective, the 747-8F carries 140 tonnes of payload over a dead weight of 220 tonnes. The plane can basically carry close to 70% of its empty weight as payload.
The A380-800F proposed a payload of 150 tonnes, but with a dry/empty weight of 280 tonnes. So it could only carry a bit over 50% of its empty weight as payload.
As for the nose door, I would think for airlines that operate large/specialised freight, the nose door is a big selling point. The market for those planes in itself is a niche though. Only the 747-400F has that option, the newer 747-8 doesn't.
@@AeroDr The 747-8F is the only in-production commercial cargo aircraft with a nose door. All 747 freighter variants have been available with a nose door.
@@odess4sd4d ah ok, I stand corrected. I thought it was one of the factory spec variants rather than airlines needing to specify it.
I always suspected the A380 wing was designed with a stretched version in mind - they've been lugging that huge wing around for years now, incurring huge extra fuel costs. No prospect of a stretched version, so A380 is uneconomic and dead in the water.
How about, passengers on the top,and freight on the lower .?
That could actually work.
I like your thinking!
But the problem with a380 as a cargo plane is that there is not a big door for cargo to go in. The 747 have a nose cargo door that can make use of the huge cargo space
That would be simply and big logistics issue on the ground
Tiger Boy That’s actually not a big issue. It’s rarely used and not an option on the passenger converted aircraft that make up majorly of the 847 cargo fleet. The 380 was just to heavy relative to cargo volume
Then the cargo door would be smaller than the 747f, the weight will increase causing higher ticket prices due to fuel needed, and passenger capacity will be smaller than the 747
I've flown on the A-380 several times from Los Angeles to China and also to South Korea. Hands down the roomiest, and most comfortable ✈ I've ever flown on, and very quiet also.
Are we not going to talk about that not so butter landing at 6:25?
THE WING FLEX
When it first flew over me here in Australia the fuselage clearly was too short for those wings...had to be prototype for larger aircraft.
1:39 A380F with MCAS+
George Shalomon too soon
NOOOOOOOO
OH DEAR
I would have really loved to have seen the ‘stretched’ version in production. It would have been a glorious super beast! That most likely would have seen Boeing offer its ultimate proposal of the 747. As a confessed ‘airframe junkie’, it would have been a fantastic!
Yes but it would've made filling the plane harder
i worked in broughton and was on the 380 in the early days and we did have the wing panels made for the freighter version but it was removed from the jig before the wing was complete
What was different in the freighter's wings?
gbin21 not that much. The stringers, which run along the panels inboard to outboard where a lot chunkier. Maybe there was more variation later in the build but we didn’t see it as it was scrapped
Calling A380-800 too small is mind blowing :D
I would have liked to have seen an a380 supertanker. This used like the 747 supertanker role of fighting fires from above. It seems the retiring aircraft may be good for this role.
Andrew Day would be too expensive to covert and market too small for considering
@@johniii8147 If if works for retired 747's the same business model could work on retiring a380's
Andrew Day Not at all. Clearly you don’t understand aviation and that they are very different airframes designed in different eras for different purposes
@@johniii8147 They converted passenger 747 not freighter versions. You need to research it
Andrew Day I’m fully aware of that. Again you’re not understanding why the 747 could’ be converted to either a cargo hauler or tanker and the 380 cannot be. Do your research as to why that’s true
Very informative and distinct. ( voice over right al the top ) keep it up.
6:25 we aint talking about it?
I think the A380 will return in the future. It was intended to handle the growth of airport congestion but it came out a bit too early.
Would it? In its original state? Might as well redesign it at that point
Or revolutionize the wings and engines
I also think the A380 will return. But only when e.g. Rolls Royce manages to build an engine that is stronger than the GE9X engine. So maybe around 2025 or 2030 something like this could happen. So an A380 with 2 engines could really be very economical. They would certainly call it A370 or A390. The engine would then have to be easily 700-900 kilo Newtons. So 30-50%. With new winglets, the A380 would easily be 50% more economical.
An "Ultra Long Range" variant would then not have to exist, because the A380Neo (or as it is called) then easily has a range of over 20,000 kilometers. Possibly even 20,000-22,000km. So you could also profitably find a route between e.g. Create LHR-SDY and also FRA -SYD .. So nonstop flights between Europe and Australia. Emirates, Singapore Airlines, British Airways, Lufthansa and many more would then also be interested in such aircraft. Something like that would be very great. But it is 50-50 whether they will do a refresh, which will also be profitable
Problem is they made morr moneymsell more small plane....
@@jul1anuhd You wouldn't want to build that much fuel capacity into the plane outright. You'll pay for it in operating empty weight and in maximum takeoff weight. Only a very few airlines would want/need that range, namely Air New Zealand and potentially Brazilian or Chinese carriers wanting to make that run. The 18,000km range of the A350-900ULR and presumably the -1000ULR as well is about the maximum you need to connect any two potential airports. Only Auckland to London, China+Korea+Vietnam to South America, and a few very obscure, probably super low demand routes are longer than 18,000km. For those routes, it's probably better to just have the option to put in an auxiliary fuel tank for those select customers/frames and otherwise just save on OEW and MTOW.
Yep i reckon get rid of the suites,bar,shower,business class. Make it purely a low cost short hauler for the uk europe holiday market. Easyjet and jetstar should buy them uo
I love this plane. Pure and simple awesome😍
Thank you for this. This was awesome!
Any variants of the best aircraft ever built would be awesome just like the original still is.
Ugly aircraft, financial disaster...
@@regist.9407 The only reason it's a "financial disaster" is because it was too late to launch since 4 engines planes started to die.
The A380 is one of the best planes out there ... I’m sad to see it coming to an end like this ...
Ahmad Alami yes, it is a shame.
At least I’ll get to ride one before their retirement, assuming this corvid thing doesn’t spin out off control.
I’ve flown on the 787, 777, 747, 737, A320, A330, A350 and the A380 as well as various other manufacturers planes and the A380 was the quietest and the smoothest landing of them all - I was amazed as I’m a Boeing guy.
I would have really like to have seen the A380 stretch, it seems like a really cool idea!
I would have loved to see the stretched A380 and the Cargo
I would have loved to see the Airbus A380 plus
It flew.
That stretched A380 would have been a sight to behold. It would have then been the largest commercial air Liner ever to fly in EVERY respect, cause the 747-8 is just a little longer than the base model A380
As far as I know (maybe I am wrong) the floor the 2nd deck is a structural part of the fuselage, and it cannot be removed to make one big cargo compartment - that's one reason the 747 is just a better freighter platform, second is the weight (as stated in the video) and third is the fact the 747 has an elevated pilot cabin over the nosecone, so the nosecone can be converted to a huge cargo loading bay which allows you to load that matches the size of the cargo compartment (so in theory you coud load a gigantic almost a plane long long piece of anything that is almost as wide and tall in width and height while the side cargo doors only fit smaller stuff). BTW interesting video.
as much as I love Boeing aircraft, the Airbus 380 is just amazing! Got to fly in one for the first time last year on our trips to and from France. Totally amazing!
This is so sad, built as a platform for future modules with the future and expandability in mind. But including all that made it too expensive and uncompetitive, so instead we get another 737 version rushed out and designed to save Boeing as much money as possible.
I’m very grateful to have been able to fly on an a380. It was with on Qatar airways back in 2016
It is also important to point out that the Nose of the 747F can lift to allow bigger stuff in, and if you kept the 2nd floor on the A380 (which i think was a design requirement for structural stability of the fuselage) you would then need specialized loaders that could reach the 2nd floor or an internal elevator system which would be a maintenance nightmare.
I would wan to see the Plus version. Looks like it could've maybe had about 5 more years of life if it was lucky. But unfortunately, there's no more chances today. Airbus has already made its final desicion to discontinue the production this year. Sad to say goddbye a such a big bird that only had a life around 14 years.
The A380- Combi... Definitely.
Maybe the least glamourous of the three, but certainly the most useful (especially in these times of reduced air travel, and thus cargo space), but also because it could make a lot of economic and environmental sense.
A380 Plus would be a nice plane to see in person
Definitely the Stretch variant, the current A380 looks stumpy with it's fuselage but has pretty elegant wings.
I would've liked to see the A380 freight, but hearing about the OEM issues, well... Nevermind. Maybe an A380 Freight Stretch would've been interesting? Probably not...
I think Airbus should have pursued a combination passenger freighter variants. Because most Freight delivery companies mostly buy Secondhand aircraft. That would also improve the marketability of the A380.
Its a shame that the A380 variants never came out. I thought the plus was a good idea. Those winglets made the A380 look better than the current one than the 800. but that is just my opinion. I think the bigger problem is the engine not being that economic enough especially when compared with the A350 and B787. Fuel prices increasing was no help either. I think Airbus should have worked more with more fuel efficient engines and fuel saving designs. If they could have made the A380 as fuel efficient as an A350, than it may have had a chance to survive.
I feel like the A380-PLUS would sell if they used the A300B strategy (giving a small amount of aircraft away for free)
TheTriplc yeah
That's a very very expensive plane to give away
TheTriplc Even if they were free, operators would soon be running at a loss. Hourly operating costs are staggering, maintenance costs are huge, fuel burn is just too high per passenger, and the break-even point (passenger occupancy per flight) also mitigated against the long-term profitability of the A380. Emirates was the ONLY operator able to make the A380 work financially, and that’s because there were a set of specific reasons/circumstances not available to any other operator of the A380. The location of their hub allowed the break-up of extra-long range routes into shorter, more fuel-efficient flights (longer flights require more fuel load, which adds to weight, which adds to fuel burn, which adds to cost & break-even point). They ordered enough of the type (almost 100, I think?) that the per-unit cost was significantly lower than any other operator paid for theirs. This large fleet brought other economies of scale; they were able to bring maintenance in-house, reducing operating costs dramatically compared to other operators, and they were also able to buy parts in volume, assuring further reductions of the per-unit prices (probably also receiving further discounts from Airbus & other vendors), and reducing down time of aircraft needing parts/maintenance (and the A380 is certainly maintenance/labor intensive as compared to other aircraft) by having a huge inventory of spares/consumables. Having such a large fleet also allowed large savings for training aircrew/ground crew, which are substantial. The price of fuel is also lower for Emirates than many other operators. Still, I believe Emirates cancelled what was their last order for the A380, which may have been the last production order for the aircraft. As they don’t keep flying planes past a certain age/flight hours, some of their older A380s have been, and the rest of the fleet will be retired as they age out until they are no longer in service with Emirates. The second-hand market prices for the A380 (hell- for just about any commercial aircraft right now due to the Covid-19 related slump in air transport!) are pretty weak, because of the operating costs. I wonder if the current low valuation of the A380 and the current low price of oil might attract a low-cost carrier to try and pick some up at relatively “bargain” prices for specific routes in anticipation of air transport returning to “normal” after travel restrictions are lifted? But I have a feeling that this crisis will be with us for some time, and will continue to negatively impact the air transport industry for even longer. If that is the case, will more carriers start to remove less profitable/unprofitable aircraft such as the A380 from their inventories sooner rather than later? I wonder who will be the last operator of the A380, and if we will be surprised by just how soon it will disappear from the skies? Is this inevitable, or will something save this ambitious plane from an early extinction? Was the A380 simply too much, too late?
@@erikarneberg11 nice paragraph...very CONCISE yet informative:)
Rizqi Ahmad Kurniawan Thank you for your kind words, I hope you, your family & friends are all well!
I hope quad jets make a return again because they way they went out was unceremonious
So sad to see this beast of an airplane end production this year...
I heard that the airplane had a lot of technical and maintenance issues, at least at the start. I don't know if that has continued. But, you don't want a plane that has to be in the hangar for fixes too much of the time.
Boeing spent far less on 747-800 upgrade. They didn't sell a lot of the passenger version, but the freighter variant sold relatively well. Total sales for 747-800 have been 154. A380 sales were only 251. Not very many given the enormous cost of developing the brand new plane.
Having the cockpit on the lower level really hurt the A380F, making it much harder to load pallets. You can open the 747F nose and slide in cargo very easily.
I have a question. I have a 1/400TH Gemini Jets A380 Fedex plane. This video says they where not produced. Did I misunderstand? I’m confused now. They usually only make real livery models.
From blogging to making TH-cam videos, congrats Simple Flying
Wish you success 😍
747-8 freighter also has the benefit of opening up the whole front for easier/faster loading and extra-large cargo space. It would have been cool to see how big the airplanes could have been constructed if it was economical for airlines. 1000 passengers on one plane would have been cool
is that nick from found and explain?
yes
You say that improvements on a neo version may have included new engines. Neo in Airbus-speak means new engine option. So I’m guessing that’s the only essential part of a neo version.
That’s why the improved cabin version as called ‘plus’: no new engines...
"Improved cabin" really was just about squeezing in an eleventh seat per row. If you think a 737 seat is cramped, these 11-abreast birds would have been much worse.
Great video, however one or two errors, production delays in 1996 killed the freighter? A380 was still on the drawing board in 96. 2006 is more likely.
FedEx: Orders A380
Airbus: Order will come in 4 years
FedEx: Oh no we meant to order the B777
XDDD
I did think that stretching the A380 was pushing the envelope a bit. I was looking forward to the launch of the A380Plus, but those planes were sadly not meant to be... oh well
I would’ve loved to see ALL the A380s. It’s such a good aircraft. Travelling in one is so comfortable and it is so pretty... it’s a shame it’s doing away :(
In light of the recent Covid19 I don't think a full economy A380 would be a good idea...
Except for evacuation flights I guess?
When you compare the A380 to the 747-8 and 777X, you really see how enormously heavy those wings are on it, due to them being designed for a longer A380. That's one of the reasons that killed the A380-800.
I have been on an emerits a380 being sat in economy was such a privilege
0:58 14 Thousand kilometres NOT 14 Hundred
Nishant Soni lol yeah got confused there
It will come back when it's light enough to fly with a twin
How about a mix between freight and passenger?
Sadly even the reigning champions of the skies the 747s are being retired after the -8 series ends production eh. I hope to get to fly on one of the -8ICs one day before theyre gone.
The winglets on the A380plus looks nice. Maybe airbus can offer it as an upgrade to exisiting customers instead, if that is possible
The passenger 747-400 and 747-8i carry cargo as well as baggage containers. Does the A380 do this as well?
Genuinely gutted that the A380 failed. I make a point of flying on it whenever it’s possible. Often routes from London to Asia. It’s such a smooth and quiet ride and a beautiful aircraft to see at the gate too. Not to mention watching them take off and land.
Definitely my fav plane to fly on. She’ll be around for another decade or so but once they’re all retired it’ll be a sad day. Much like the end of Concorde.
2:15, there was an error about the calcul of the empty weight 610 000 pounds - 485 000 p= 125 000 p
125 000 pounds x 0.454 kg = 56 750 kg or 56.7 tons less NOT 86 ton less
The original proposal for the A380 called for 1,000 seats. However, no airport would have had the infrastructure, terminals, etc, to accommodate it. Airbus at one point proposed folding wings like aircraft carrier planes to make it happen.
I can’t wait for the A380-900. Yeah !!!!
It's not happening. What did you take from the video exactly?
They could have put double folding winglets like the 777x on the A380 plus. Also the A380 freighter would have looked nice and carry larger things across the globe
We need A380 BEHEMOTH variant!! 😀
A380 Antonov, lol
@@bigbigmurphy
YESSSSSSS 😀
Whats the difference between the neo and 389?
it's ahead of its time, or maybe it was walking the limits of human connectivity.
Its one impressive piece of machinery that will always catch the eye of the traveller's.
I'm actually really sad that it's going soon. It's one of my favourite planes of all time because of its Iconic design
2:56 is that a Mcdonald Douglas MD-11 without a main body gear?
Its a MD-10-10
The A380plus was actually built, and was flown at the Paris Airshow.
Passengers: we love the a380, thank you Airbus.
Airlines: No more for you. Back into the sardine cans.
Nice bgm... What's it called
Now I’m starting to wonder what a short A380 would look like... (like the 747SR (SP)
An a380 with like 4, 2 level suites that I could never ever afford. But it’s a cool idea
ETOPS and the massive efficiency of newer long range twinjets destroyed the A380's chances of success (and the passenger 747s probably aren't long for this world either for the same reasons), but it's a shame because watching these behemoths take off and land is something special.
Yeah they're insane. There was an extreme rare case when there where 2 Emirates A380 on the ground in Zurich due delays. Seeing both of them next to each other on that Airport looked so rediculous.
I would've liked to have seen the A380 stretch just to see how much more outrageous Airbus could make the A380.
Still A380 is the best ever made so far...improvement in a must.
A380 full freighter with the cockpit moved up to the 2nd deck and a swing up or swing side open front.
A380F: **sees gravestone**
Also A380F: lies
JayJay Aviation lmaoo
No A380SP? The fuselage is shorter than the wingspan.
A380 had never single crash in history, but boieng did
I still believe they could make it work, especially the A380 Stretch if they'd focus more heavily on marketing to primarily Southeast Asian Airlines, and even more so on Chinese Airlines. It's the PERFECT market for it, and, almost exactly matching to that of demand and general Chinese Business mentalities that are present and constant there. The question would not so much be that of viability of the sales potential of the product, but rather, their PR & Marketing strategies and focuses while selling it. They require a very niche and specific set of tactics, keywords and examples to properly excite and appeal to the Chinese marketplace, while also creating a large amount of confidence in the planes to the extent it'd likely result in rather quick commitments to orders for it.
The Combi also is one that would still have a good-great opportunity to make a decent-good amount of sales, though, the marketing success and focuses would be far more global than that of the stretch, and, in itself, be one of the more tougher to figure out the strategies to use in each market in their attempts to make confident sales.
The American market in regards to passenger fill on most flights within the US, and North America as a whole, is far more unpredictable and hit or miss than the other markets for flights in the rest of the world for sure. This of course made for the incredibly tough sell to airlines here in the US of any A380 Variants. The bigger the aircraft, the more squirrely the prospects of having them gets here. It's just never been that viable of an option here. And the US is the world's biggest airline market by far in terms of total passengers and flights in a single nation. Yet it's always been an unpredictable beast for consistency on passenger fill on any flights at all. Sometimes you'll get a fill to capacity, other times 3/4 fill and then the next day you'll find yourself averaging a suddenly low of 1/4-1/2 filled flights without warning or explanation. Then a week later, and you're back to being unable to have any more ticket sales on the route due to a consistent fill to capacity on it that winds up lasting for 3 weeks before going back to low fills yet again. That's again, simply not at all viable for large aircraft, as they need and require a confidence in knowing the route it will serve will consistently have 3/4-100% fill each flight in order to then cover the costs of the craft and make it profitable.
And of course the last major bit that made these wonderful works of art nonviable here in the US market is simply that it came in too late in regards to marketing and production, and, with the way our transportation systems and airports work here, you were not going to convince the taxpayers nor government to expand airports around the nation to fit these behemoths. From the get go here it was blatant that only a very select few, likely only as many as you'd be able to count on one hand, would actually go through with the necessary changes & expansions necessary to accommodate them. And low and behold, that sentiment was correct. If I recall correctly the US only has 6 or 7 that ever did so.
It is incredibly sad however as these aircraft are truly works of art and are incredibly legendary in my books. I wish they would have came in at the optimal time, and our government did not operate as it does when it comes to transportation thus instead encouraging the expansions of as many airports here as possible to accommodate the A380, so that we could have seen many more and a far longer lifespan to these aircraft in use.
As AIRBUS has suggested it can easily tweek the A380 in a great many ways, like any manufacture in any industry it really does depends on customer & future market trends to dictate projects!
The A380 will just be GRYOED & VOLTED by AIRBUS for a future project.
I really would have liked to see a stretch double decker 380.
No point, it's already too large.
I would love to see the A380 plus and stretch
The A380plus flew at the Paris Airshow.
With the current development of Aviation, I’m pretty sure it’s time will come again.
similar to 757
Why ?
Fruxaq with COVID striking down all traveling plans, I’m certain that many people will fly again once it’s over once and for all.
A380plus stretch 😍❤️
I'd like to see quadjets in the air again...
begs the question why they didn't put winglets on from the start?
I’d want to see a stretched a380 with winglets and some ge90-115b’s
Too large too make commercial sense.
A flying troop and tank carrier that could deliver a battalon to any combat zone on Earth!
All you have to do is make the aircraft squat like a C5 or a C130 does for loading. Good luck with that.
Converting a passenger aircraft into a freighter is more involved than just installing a large cargo door. There’s the inside support structure that holds the floor and pallets.
The vast majority of freighter aircraft are aircraft of Boeing design due to the design philosophy of the company. Designing for secondary use after passenger retirement gives Boeing a huge advantage.