Good idea or Bad?
Edited by mat64 (Forum Moderator): Thread closed due to it been bumped.
Printable View
Good idea or Bad?
Edited by mat64 (Forum Moderator): Thread closed due to it been bumped.
[IMG]http://www.****************/uploads/d354add6cb.jpg[/IMG]
For anyone wh doesn't know.
i wanna go on one though, i think they will hit the market well
very good idea :D
I dont know, I think it is a cool idea, but I also think it is too big, and some airlines might not be able to fill them up, and compete with fuel costs.
good idea. looks nice also, saw a documentary on it yesterday. =]
Overall a good idea, as long as it's security is high because if a terrorist got hold of one of those alot more people would die than on a normal Boeing 747 or whatever
Yep, also how do they know if a wing wont break?Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacat
Tests?Quote:
Originally Posted by ThugDub
Health and saftey laws are very strict when it comes to airlines.
I forgot about that :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Chaz
I think its a good idea, Good for big airlines wanting to make big profits and wanting to transport lots of people at one time
A very good idea, higher levels of comfort, pleasure and an overall more enjoyable way of flying.
We don't want speed now adays, comfort is what we want.
Aslong it's safe and comfy nobody really minds...
The people that make these are genius' do you really think they would go wrong enough so the wing would break? :sQuote:
Originally Posted by ThugDub
You know what some people are like, they come up with most intelligent invention, but forget the smallest thing... lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Neversoft
Overall it's a good idea, looks hawt aswell, also it would cut down on fuel emission as it would mean less planes in the air as they can carry x3/x2 the passengers ;)
Good pointQuote:
Originally Posted by Steven.
But the wing breaking wouldn't be a small thing. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Marc
Concorde had both. It was also the safest airline in the skies. It got pulled out of service.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiet
concorde wasn't safe :|
W00t look at teh moster. I think its good.
There was only 1 or 2 crashes. That is pretty amazing seeing as it was in service for a few decades.Quote:
Originally Posted by PostgreSQL
The only reason concorde crashed is because the runway wasnt checked or something. can't really blame the plane itself.
they look wicked. [:
good idea =]
oh and I helenownsme, the reason was that the concorde crashed was because the runway was too short. aha.
;]
Good idea xD
No offence to some of you here, but you have no idea about airlines/aircraft whatsoever.
1 - The concorde wasn't an airline, it was an aircraft created by both british and french engineers in the 60's. It was only used by two airlines, British airways and Air france.
2 - The concorde wasn't no safer than any other aircraft. Although they only had one crash in it's entire history, it was only flown three times a day, as a comparision to the 747 which may have crashed 100 times, but 100's of 747's fly worldwide a day.
3 - The airbus A380 can hold up to over 880 passengers in an all economy configuration (Basically no first class). People saying that they wouldn't make any money are utter thickos. As basically you could stick 880 people on a flight to NYC for 350 quid return.
oh my bad. i knew mine was wrong, heard it ages ago and couldn't remember the cause ;pQuote:
Originally Posted by Legend.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostgreSQL
Its about as safe as any other plane, Just because the crash was a famous and well known one, People class it as unsafe
We knew that, what the hell are you on?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomo4
I want to disrecard this point purely for the fact that double negative makes you look like a '****, but I wont.Quote:
2 - The concorde wasn't no safer than any other aircraft. Although they only had one crash in it's entire history, it was only flown three times a day, as a comparision to the 747 which may have crashed 100 times, but 100's of 747's fly worldwide a day.
Most planes are only used 2 or 3 times a day, regardless of how many other planes of that's class are flown.
The A380 will only make money if the idea takes off (excuse the pun) as it is a hell of alot of money to spend closing down runways at airports for they can extend them to accomodate these behemoths.Quote:
3 - The airbus A380 can hold up to over 880 passengers in an all economy configuration (Basically no first class). People saying that they wouldn't make any money are utter thickos. As basically you could stick 880 people on a flight to NYC for 350 quid return.
Very good points.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPresident
Brilliant, the A380 is a milestone in aviation history.
The more they can get on is better for the airlines, and will inturn be cheaper.
I want it start flying regulary, so I can fly with it :)
It reminds me of a bumble bee. Shouldn't be able to fly, but can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davetaylor
Concorde was safe, Except for one little thing, The Problem was fixed but 9/11 had hit the Airline Industry hard so AirFrance took theirs off then British Airways pulled the remaining ones out of service - Shame :(
I like this Airbus A380 looks weird :P
it looks awesome. :eusa_danc cant wait to fly in one
i think it is good becaus u can fit more passengers on it, but also means more in fuel
dont no how it got in farnborough airport on the airshow there runways are like small lol
Good idea and a beautiful plane in my opinion.
Its weird how it can actually geto ff the ground, looking at the size of it.
But I'd love to fly in one