Why are the Jumbo-jets disappearing?

[@PavlosPapageorgiou]

You should change the pillow on your right to green, so that we know which way the couch is facing.

[@MentourPilot]

Hahaha! I have actually thought of doing that, I’m such a nerd....

[@ΑΡΗΣΚΟΡΝΑΡΑΚΗΣ]

Mentour Pilot how you feel, that Joe flies with B747?

[@Engineer9736]

ΑΡΗΣ ΚΟΡΝΑΡΑΚΗΣ What do you want him to say? That he’s jealous now? Good on Joe that he made it there.

[@alex_inside]

ΑΡΗΣ ΚΟΡΝΑΡΑΚΗΣ I guess that in his inner he is crying because of it but he will never admit that.

[@DingXiaoke]

Hahaha...And an additional white pillow at top center

[@lllordllloyd]

A380s are so lovely to fly in, quiet, roomy, smooth. Of course the airline business model doesn't give a rat's arse about passenger comfort. Great video.

[@icemanUH]

From a passengers point of view no other airplane can touch the A380. My girlfriend is afraid of flying. Only knowing we are flying in A380 takes of some of the preasure.

[@da4127]

I honestly dont care a bit less comfort for a cheaper price, and Im sure most people agree with me

[@Kpopzoom]

And they don't give a rats arse for passenger safety either.

[@Chatsu8o]

@@da4127 Regional, sure. International: No way. 16+ hours on a plane I'm clawing on the doors trying to get out, my entire body revolts. I hate nothing more than the discomfort of being stuck in cattle class for almost an entire day.

[@Chatsu8o]

So, to add to my point: I find it very sad that mainstream supersonic flight never became a thing. It's hard and not economical etc. etc. But it's still a damn shame. I would mind international travel a hell of a lot less if it was just FASTER.

[@JQ24]

I've never been that interested in aviation but after finding your channel by chance after chasing so many KZbin rabbit holes, I'm learning quite a lot of things. Thanks for sharing the knowledge!

[@olusolasoretire6524]

Apart from the fact that I'd love you to be the Captain each time I'm in the air, your knowledge of the workings of the Aviation industry is amazing. From 14:10 you made a spot-on prediction that has actually come true. The Airbus A380 program has been scrapped and Emirates canceled a lot of their A380 orders which dealt the final blow to the entire program.

[@TSERJI]

"From 14:10 you made a spot-on prediction that has actually come true." Yup. Lufthansa, BA, Qatar, and Etihad originally had 'retired' their A380's in the pandemic, thinking those planes would never fly for them again... or so they thought. Fast forward a couple of years, and due to increased demand in air travel, they've indeed brought them back and have restarted regular service with them!

[@AboveandBeyondGlobalDrones]

~ That upstairs lounge in the 747 was quite nice.

[@bikeralw]

I've now flown from the UK to NZ by A380 over a dozen times to see my daughter and family who emigrated there. Wonderful aircraft, it'll be a sad day when it's withdrawn.

[@chancerNW]

I remember the pride that those of us who worked on the A380 felt when it first flew, The first flight of the A350 didn't illicit the same feelings. For all its commercial failing the A380 still stirs my heart like no other Airbus type.

[@yorktown99]

Two other problems that jumbo jets face. 1) Not all airports have the physical space for such planes. Fully loaded and fueled, these craft require very long runways to take off. They require more space on the ground and in the hangers. 2) It takes a very long time to load and unload such planes. For a variety of reasons, airline companies utilize inefficient methods to get passengers on and off. Turn-around time is critical to keep costs down. Trying to process hundreds of passengers faster would require utilizing multiple gates & jetways, and thus more scarce space at the terminal.

[@stoneysteenkamp4752]

Small fact, The A380 does not use more RWY to takeoff or land than a B777

[@rtg2427]

Is it just me or I get amazed seeing such giant planes take offing and landing

[@n3on_face659]

take offing? what english variaton is that?? i think you mean taking off..

[@richardwheeler6115]

@@n3on_face659 What English variation does not use capitalization???

[@ashterfadgadget817]

@@richardwheeler6115 Capitalisation. There's no Z in capitalise.

[@Milesco]

@@ashterfadgadget817 In the U.S. there is! 😁 (And there's no "u" in "color" ! 😉)

[@leeonardodienfield402]

@@ashterfadgadget817 yes there is

[@chefchefton7117]

I would feel very safe & comfortable with this man piloting my flight. 👍🏼

[@danielaramburo7648]

@@bfc3057 how do you know for sure he is a pilot? He tells you he is a pilot even before he says hi to you.

[@tradeladder146]

Ive heard he Drinks alot. 😃😃

[@NunYa953]

I don't care so much about why they aren't using HUGE jets anymore as why does every airline suck now? I remember as a kid in the 90s the level of service on a plane was awesome! Food was good, they gave you an ENTIRE can of pop instead of a tiny cup with 4 ice cubes and 2 oz of pop. Airplanes were clean and people were polite. I've been on some flights that are less comfortable than a weekend in a county jail.

[@andret4403]

I never thought airline food was that good. Don't really miss it. Airport amenities at least at the larger airport are better than past. Rather have a nicer meal at the airport than reheated so so meal on the aircraft. On longer International flights you still get meals. As for full can of pop, just ask. Most times they will give you a full can. I ask all the time and only once was I told no and only reason they didn't give full can, they were running low. I feel we have more choices in airlines and flight options than the past. We want to fly cheaply and this is what we get as result. If you want better travel experience, travel business or first class. Back then you may get a movie and hope it is of interest. Now you can stream many choices. In some ways thing are better.

[@F15ElectricEagle]

The answer is simple: airline traveling was an expensive luxury that evolved into a cheap commodity.

[@Quotenwagnerianer]

Basically the ticket prices dropped too much. That's what happened.

[@NunYa953]

@@Quotenwagnerianer That could be part of it I guess but airlines are so fucked the these days that I highly doubt it's a result of just 1 reason. Literally, in the United States at least, the only thing airlines have been successful with is safety.

[@Quotenwagnerianer]

I'm positive that it was just price pressure. Some companies started with absurdly low fares, that could only be calculated by cutting spending down, which is always about personnel and wages. Those prices drew passengers to those companies and that in return forced other companies to offer those prices as well. But they had no serious business model for that. And that basically destroyed service aboard.

[@FalconX88]

I really dislike the trend to smaller aircrafts. A 7 hour flight with Lufthansa and the 747-8 or A380 is so much nicer than the 6.5 hour flight with United where they cram people into their terrible 737-900.

[@etiennedegaulle3817]

Just had a 5 hour United flight on a 737. It was miserable.

[@bmwf1joel]

What do you expect from United?

[@FalconX88]

@@bmwf1joel well after that nothing. But from what I've heard all of the US airlines pretty much suck, or is there a better one?

[@gamewizard1760]

Wow. A 737 for a flight as long as that? The trips that I took that took 7-8 hours were in Boeing 757 and 767's and even a 777 on one trip. I can't imagine making a trip of that length in a 737, even a long endurance variant.

[@joshuaweingart4743]

FalconX88 JetBlue and Alaska have been pretty decent at least in my experience

[@andreifelderean]

It's gonna be so sad when we wont see these big fellas flying anymore...so majestic and beautiful...

[@MentourPilot]

Yeah, I fully agree.

[@romeomike62]

throughout the video, i felt like i was in his house, having a normal afternoon chat. QUALITY.

[@cuper4295]

Some additional data. The Boeing 747 started off as Boeing's submission for the Air Force large freighter aircraft bid. This was eventually won by Lockhead with the C5. Boeing was left with a perfectly good candidate for a commercial freighter with most of the engineering already paid for by the Air Force. And this design could be converted into a passenger+freight design at very low cost. This was not happenstance--Boeing had passenger versions of the Air Force project on the drawing boards all during the C5 competition. === As you alluded to, Boeing had already announced the phase out of the 747 before AirBus committed the 380 to production for just the reasons you stated--shift away from hub-and-spoke and toward point-to-point. The decision to go ahead with the 380 was driven completely by the ego of the AirBus CEO at the time to have the biggest "dick" in the world. AirBus decision making was so screwed up at that time due to having to please all the owner countries, that he was able to push this horrible business decision through, with predictable results that we see today.

[@Milesco]

_"The decision to go ahead with the 380 was driven completely by the ego of the AirBus CEO at the time to have the biggest "dick" in the world."_ Yeah, based on a documentary I saw a few months go on the A380, I have to agree.

[@mk3a]

Boeing actually had to make another 747 (the 747-8 using 787 engines and technology) to give Airbus a reality check.

[@kenoliver8913]

While not disagreeing with the ego driven decision, the problem was compounded by the fact that the 380 design was too conservative. There definitely was and is a sizeable niche for jumbos to fill ultratthick pax and freight routes (think NY-LA, or many Chinese and some intra-european routes). The aim should have been to get a product attractive to the larger LCCs, not just the luxury brands. It should have been easily convertible to a pure freighter. They should have tried real hard to make it a huge twin (possibly with rear engines and a T-tail to keep the landing gear length down). It should have had a fuselage shaped optimised for medium range with the pax squashed in, not longhaul with an emphasis on passenger comfort. It should have had folding wingtips extension to allow a high aspect ratio while still fitting into normal airport slots.

[@mrrolandlawrence]

also worth noting is that after 2001, security went crazy. no longer transferring to a new plane being a quick affair. another kick in the balls for the hub & spoke model.

[@pwilkesful]

One would think that a stamp on the back of your hand that was different every day should be all that a transferring person should need to show that they have already been cleared. But maybe the government doesn't care about your inconvenience.

[@zrirukishizutakiari]

Depends on the country (and which country your initial flight arrived from). I don't remember having to go through security so often when flying in Europe. I fly regularly Paris to Moscow, and often it is cheaper transfer tickets for me. Have not had to clear security on those either way - except when flying Swiss. That may be different in the US I guess.

[@SeattleMarinerMan]

You’d rather have a good chance of getting jacked? Watch plane jackings on KZbin and see how many end well. I’ll take an extra few minutes over slamming into something at 500 mph.

[@jeffpowell8308]

That is a underappreciated point. This is another way in which troglodytes from a medieval hell have fucked up a great invention of western civilization and more reason why they should be exterminated like the deadly pests that they are.

[@BryonLape]

With t-ray machines, security could be very quick and easy, with the need for few people. Unfortunately, these machines do not vote.

[@zexzex8312]

I disagree with removing B-747 and A-380 from the service. For trans-atlantic or trans-pacific flights those smaller airplanes are horrible. We're going backwards in comfort, instead of advancing forward. Everything is downsizing, cost-reducing and shrinking in the bloody 21st century. Crisis after crisis, saving on everything, all products are getting cheap, fragile, unreliable, with planned obsolescence built-in.

[@akronymus]

@ Zex Zex Good point. Indeed, the 747 was a great gain in comfort when it came up. May be, if some company tries to offer it, there will be demand for it.

[@wycombewanderer6649]

I've noticed listening to ATC tapes on here that there have been quite a few diversions due to medical emergencies of A380s, makes sense when you think about it 600 people on board there's more chance of one being taken ill than a 400 seat plane, then you have to start thinking about diversion airports and dumping a whole lot of fuel.

[@akronymus]

@@wycombewanderer6649 well, none of my numerous flights was ever diverted because of medical problems - so I think that there is no significant difference between a plane for 400 or 600. Diversion in A380s may to some regard come from the fact that elderly people tend to spend more on traveling than younger ones. A 20 years old wants to see the world, a first-class-cabin is out of interest.

[@mytwocents7464]

Welcome to XXIth century's capitalism. The good old days of the welfare state are long gone.

[@akronymus]

@@mytwocents7464 I wouldn't call getting paid for work adequately 'welfare'.

[@KotakMeister]

I remember my former company being the launch customer for the A380. We were the first commercial technicians/engineers for this giant...man were we proud. At least i knew i was. She wasn't the easiest to work on...that honour goes to the 777's. But she was an engineering marvel. I never got tired of watching her take-off or land. I don't think she'll be disappearing anytime soon though, at least not in the next decade. But i do agree with your points, and I'd like to add that with jet-fuel prices going crazy and the advent of budget carriers, we will see less and less of the flying behemoths. Great video 👍

[@Truthseeker1515]

The 747 has never failed commercially. It's nearly 50 years old and served it's purpose.

[@shebbs1]

A little simplistic:: the 747 doesn't really sell now either, and certainly not on sufficient numbers to justify the -8 development costs, even though much of it is still 1960's tech (pqrts of the wings, much of the airframe and controls..

[@voss0749]

@@shebbs1 747-8F will continue to sell for years. 777-9x will replace 747-8i for most purposes though.

[@104thDIVTimberwolf]

...and still does it better than anything else in the sky. V a747s, in all variants, carry more in any three-month period that all A-380s will in all of their time in service, ever. They only say about 1p years of production and they're beginning to scrap them because the leasing companies that own them can't find any takers for them in the used market.

[@mervinpeter7990]

Agree, 747 served its purpose during it's time, unfortunately the 380 was 20 years too late. The 380 is spectacular though!

[@benalihamza4561]

Rewatching this after today's announcement to shut down the A380, your videos are great dear Mentour. Thank you so much !!

[@Jacks_n]

I’ll miss Pan Am, they were well before my time but I’ll miss them

[@richardwheeler6115]

Pan Am sold tickets to the freeking MOON! 'Nough said.

[@adamfrazer5150]

Same here, an aviation institution - that wire globe logo, one of the signs of the times (that I wasn't quite around for, but still). I do still have a pair of TWA wings and, more excitingly, a still-sealed packet of honey roasted peanuts ! No clue why I felt it necessary to keep them 😬

[@adamfrazer5150]

@@richardwheeler6115 too true ! Think I need to check out the ads for that again 😎

[@danielwanner8708]

@Tony El they got screwed big time . It was an Amazing airline , 747 is part of its' legacy .

[@jstagirlinthisworld]

@@danielwanner8708 can you elaborate? Like OP, I feel this bizarre nostalgia not just for PanAm, but also TWA, so I'd love your info, experiences, and (most importantly for me lol) hot takes!!

[@rexremedy1733]

I love the A380! It is an awesome plane to fly with! It’s like a ship.

[@HeavyDestroyer]

The big fellas are a *beautiful* sight to see, hope they don’t disappear

[@TheReal_ist]

I'll be fine whats going to replace them. The BFR lol jk. Cheap mass rocket planetary travel will be the replacement just won't be SpaceX as the main provider, just the kickstarter company. Point is I'm fine with cheap rockets replacing these slow fat metal birds. Rockets are the future especially when the rich start to take advantage of the under 30min travel time to the other side of the planet. Ya metal birds won't compete sorry bud.

[@MrBlindbird]

An-225 Mriya ... ;-)

[@IntheeyesofMorbo]

agreed and i dont see that changing for probably 100-150 years - that might be enough time for fusion rockets and automation/AI systems to drive spacecraft enough to make it safe enough for regular travel (the tv show and novel series " the expanse" comes to mind). Chemical rockets are just too dangerous and will be reserved for automated probes or exploration flights to Mars. Fusion research projects like the Lockheed device or the Bussard Polywell might pay off in 10-15 years - if so they will first be installed in subs and large naval missile cruisers and aircraft carriers. As the tech is refined I figure another 10-15 years beyond that before they are used for power generation in space (or to power various electro-magnetic based drive systems like Ion drives or VASIMR). With more advanced anuetronic fusion (harder to do) you might have fusion powered aircraft (the size of an a380 or b747 etc). Such A/C would need minimal radiation shielding and have insane range - that would change things but I figure thats 50+ years off at a minimum. As time went on the fusion plants would slowly get smaller and lighter.

[@Johninadelaide2022]

Why couldn't we have suborbital planes that hop over the Earth Say London to Sydney or such? Travel in a an arc shape

[@fistpunder]

I think maybe a ramscoop may be better than rockets. Naturally aspirated combustion is always safer and cheaper. Why haul an oxidizer if you can just let your engine breathe atmosphere?

[@krissantana4660]

I love all the Swenglish variants Petter uses, they are so logical and fill niche expressions. Shrudder is definitely in my vocabulary now.

[@MrHav1k]

I hope to get to fly on an A380 before it's retired for good. It's just super cool to see a plane that big. It's so striking when you see it taking off.

[@wildorinj]

Great Video, a very well explained and logically organised friendly chat! I've flown long distance on Boeing 777, Boeing 747 and Airbus A380 in cattle class every time, and I must say, the A380 is by far the most comfortable, especially when flown by Qantas. Not only that but the Qantas cabin crew were polite, friendly and very hard working, the food was good, the other passengers were well behaved and the seats had decent legroom. I won't name the worst, but on one airline the passengers were noisy, bad tempered and boorish, the food was awful and I was made to feel I really was in cattle class. The flying experience depends on so many different variables, some get it right and others fail. I've experienced both.

[@gregghanson6095]

@Chloe Moon guessing it's a U.S. carrier!

[@nammie12345]

Think Quantas was good, try Singapore Air.

[@arturoc2c714]

Don't be scared to say

[@azvinlazuardy]

Completely agree with you. A380 felt so stable I can't feel any turbulence.

[@guyontheinternet8891]

@@azvinlazuardy yeah its a pretty good plane to bad its production was stopped and it isnt being used much anymore :C

[@PopCultureJunkie78]

Good analysis. ;) I think it’s such a pity that the A380 hasn’t been more successful - as a passenger, it’s one of the most comfortable (not to mention the quietest) aircraft to travel on. I will actively seek it out in planning long haul trips. As others have said, there is the possibility it could have a renaissance if more airports become slot-constrained.

[@Jamesbrown-xi5ih]

I found the 747-400 to be better, in my personal experience. Nearly all of my Long Haul has been in 878's or 777's, with a few other types thrown in. Of note, the United Air Lines 747-400 from NRT to LAX, and a Delta A330 from NRT to SEA (I hated that flight.) Most of my long flights tend to start from LAX. The A380 just..... Wasn't that outstanding for me.

[@PopCultureJunkie78]

James brown I guess it comes down to personal preference and the airline cabin. I flew Qantas A380 from Sydney to LAX and was really impressed. I flew back San Francisco to Sydney on a 747-400 and it just felt tired, outdated, noisier and less spacious in comparison. But don’t get me wrong, the 747 is a beautiful aircraft ... she’s just showing her age. 😉😂👍

[@sheboyganshovel5920]

Slot constraints are more of an issue in a hub-spoke configuration than in a point-to-point configuration. A lot of smaller airports end up having capacity to spare, and nothing to do with it, while the hubs almost inevitably overload.

[@GrasponReality]

Emirates also very aggressively prices their connecting flights, so you get situations where flying many hours out of the way on Emirates will still be hundreds of dollars cheaper than flying the most direct routing. Not likely to attract a lot of business class travelers but will attract budget conscious coach passengers. Just looked at Melbourne to Johannesburg as an example and it was $300 cheaper on Emirates than the next cheapest option... and was $800 less than the shortest option... MEL-SYD-JNB

[@eriposs3638]

A flight in an A380 is just outstanding... a pity it's discontinued.

[@hopeedwards776]

I'm watching this in 2022, and I am really interested to find out how the COVID pandemic has affected this hub system idea. Of course, it wouldn't help the case of the jumbo jets, but in terms of fewer flights flying, is the air industry re-prioritisng the idea of the hubs again?

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

Its a shame, I love massive giants in the sky. Its just amazing to see.

[@MentourPilot]

True that!

[@josephpacelli3691]

Probably because the costs to run the aircraft

[@jayawardhantadikonda8827]

Crisp. Very well presented without the jargon. Nice job Mentour Pilot

[@jullietmburu9672]

For some reason this vid turned out to be a very good business lecture.

[@Ambarthetravellingchef]

I only fly a380s on long haul out of Australia, so sad in some years they all will be gone... will make the most of them.

[@karldunne5595]

Same here!!..... China southern business class A380!!.......... 😍.

[@janhoyle1462]

It’s worth it to have 747s & A380s for flights to Australia or Asia. I hate the slimline planes because I feel cramped. The 767 is great!

[@covidhoax7646]

767 is cozy, but not spacious. Great aircraft though.

[@RahmanSajid]

I always asked this question. Glad to know the answer to this amazing video. Of course I enjoyed it Petter, see you on Sunday only if you don’t have early :)

[@eisaatana96]

"Glad to know the answer to this amazing video" ?

[@Nemo_Point]

I think he meant he is pleased to learn of the answer to the question posed at the start of the video - ie: why are the giants disappearing? Not everyone's first language is English - just wish my foreign languages were as good as his English is.

[@dsanalysis5013]

RS Aviation Ironic how Airbus intentionally stopped making parts for the Concorde because it was rolling out the A380 and thought that jumbo was the future. Now the Concorde would be ideal

[@perarheim1255]

DS Analysis IMO if Concorde was ideal today, you would se competitors aiming for that segment. Boeing predicted today's market and went for the 787 and 777-300 ER. Better economy/environment, comfort and safety than the narrow niche segment Concorde satisfied.

[@LordDragon1965]

Concorde was an interesting platform but way to expensive to fly and maintain. If a 777 could go supersonic, you'd have a Concorde Killer. But the power "hill" to climb over the sound barrier is too steep for that to be practical.

[@wildzach]

I'm glad i got a glimpse of aviation as a kid when it was still exciting. DC-10's, 727's, MD-80's, 737 Classic, 747's... i rode on them but was too young to really remember except for the 737 Classic. Now, every airplane is exactly the same. A quiet, plastic twin. You can't even tell planes apart unless you are an aviation enthusiast and know a lot about planes. One of the memories i cherish most is as a little kid pre-9/11, hanging out at the terminal waiting for my grandma's plane to pull in (either a 737 Classic or MD-80), and watching a passenger DC-10 come barreling down the runway and rotating right in front of me, and watching it vanish into the clouds, while the entire airport shook. I will never forget that. You don't hear the planes anymore at that same airport. If it is due to quieter planes or better sound-proofing, i'm not sure. But the airport has become a boring place.

[@MentourPilot]

Yes, some of the soul disappears when the planes get to technical. The upside is better environment and less noise pollution around the airports... but I know what you mean.

[@Jamesbrown-xi5ih]

Part of what hurts the flying experience for me is, everyone just tends to be on their phone now. In the 90's and 00's, you could talk with people, and most everyone seemed friendly, or at least willing to have a short chat waiting for that next flight, but now.... Everyone just seems so cold and cut off in their own world. Making it worse, you're right. The roar of the engines is gone, the amazing shapes of diverse types all gone and replaced by various sizes of essentially the same aircraft, regardless of maker. It's quite sad.

[@wildzach]

Mentour Pilot no disrespect to the NG of course! The NG is my second favorite 737 generation, after the Classic haha. And it remains possibly my favorite modern airliner.

[@jefftube58]

I rode on several DC-10's and L-1011's in the 70's. Marvelous airplanes with lots of room.

[@Dustz92]

The 727 was retired so early because they could not reduce its noise, so yeah

[@johnferguson7235]

The other major problem with the super jumbo is that airports don't want to spend the money to accommodate them. The airport operators don't want to build new taxiways, aprons, gates, and maintenance hangers that are big enough for a super jumbo to fit.

[@MentourPilot]

Yes, that’s also true.

[@Avantime]

Emiirates serve plenty of airports successfully with over 100 A380s, so it's not as big of a problem here. If the airlines order the superjumbo, the airports will upgrade to accommodate. The problem is: they don't. A good case example is Auckland, a relatively tiny city compared to the Asian megacities, but still get a ton of A380 service from Emirates as the airline need the Superjumbos to earn extra money during the Sydney curfew. With the recent completion of Pier B Auckland how has 4 gates capable of servicing the A380.

[@JaidenJimenez86]

Although that is a very valid point, if you take congestion at European cities as an example, I feel that perhaps upgrading regional airports may be a cheaper alternative to entirely new internationals, or expanding internationals further. Or maybe regionals would be expanded upon to take local traffic away from the larger hubs, freeing up capacity for heavies there.

[@Avantime]

Most European hubs do not feel much pressure from congestion because low-cost carriers are sucking traffic away to secondary airports, and most hub airports (with the notable exception of Heathrow) are built on greenfield land that can easily be expanded. The A380 is built for 3 markets - The Gulf carriers, Heathrow and China. It has enjoyed decent success with the Gulf carriers, but the Heathrow market didn't materialise because the likes of Gatwick, Luton and Stansted sucked market share and new traffic away from Heathrow, with many passengers content to simply get to London no matter how far away the airport actually is. As an international hub Heathrow is also losing market share against competing hubs like Frankfurt, and Brexit is making London less attractive as a business destination. The Chinese market didn't materialise because congestion is concentrated in enroute airspace (the Chinese military owns the skies quite literally) and the Chinese airlines would rather endure endemic delays and passenger fury, than to risk flying empty superjumbos. Another major consideration is competition from high speed trains, which are heavily promoted and subsidised by the government. For the Beijing-Shanghai route, the train is simply more reliable with better on-time performance, more comfortable with better legroom, can carry more luggage, and you can get from city centre to city centre.

[@atomicgeneral]

Petter, I love your videos. A very small point : it's "spoke and hub" not "bespoke ...". Of course, I speak 0% Swedish.

[@HT-zx8dn]

Globalism was promising a great future in the '90s. I think, Europeans were anticipating an uplift in per capita income especially for China and India (3 billion people in total). That would trigger a sizable increase in intercontinental travel, that would require dozens of A380s in service, which did not realize.

[@ASteven7]

true

[@Psychlist1972]

I flew Emirates A380 business class earlier this summer. It was amazing. I have never had business class that nice.

[@floridmonkey2723]

Pete Brown I’ve never had business class

[@DCherbonnier]

Emirates has a high standards on all models.

[@surenot9491]

also the economy in a380 compaired to others is nice. had a ride this summer from DUS to DUB and back.

[@johnvictorengland7703]

Same. I flew Qatar to Sydney in business class. It was extraordinarily nice. I showed up to Sydney feeling completely rested and ready to work.

[@yamaforever]

Very nice videos you making, very interesting from a passenger side of view to see how it works, thanks and keep it up:)

[@Kevin19700]

Excellent video! Quite informative.

[@thomasfritz6425]

I heard the 747 was always referred to as the Mother and every pilot loved to fly her because of her smooth ride and ease at flying her.

[@chocolatmood]

I haven’t heard that term, but I remember they called it the Queen of the Skies.

[@davefloyd9443]

Still "The Queen". Aesthetically classic 747 destroys the frumpy A380.

[@frankyw8803]

Really ? 🤣

[@stephenhosking7384]

7:50. Thanks for the explanation of why the jumbo-jets leverage the hub system, and how point--to-point system favours the smaller jets, but I missed an explanation of why the point-to-point systems came to dominate. There was brief mention of geo-politics, and also business passengers wanting more frequent flights, but it wasn't convincing for such a fundamental change. AFAIK, Boeing 747's were used for transcontinental US flights, but not any more. My guess (and it is a guess, from my own 60 years as a passenger) is that in the 1960s and 70s a plane trip was a "big deal" for most people. A holiday to, say, Europe was a flight to London and then two weeks or more moving around. We was accepted that the preparations (visas, innoculations, etc.) would last for weeks, and we accepted a long flight in a jumbo jet, which left once a day, as part of the process. Since then, holidays and personal travel (eg. sport and smaller occasions) for all ages have become more routine, and we'd expect to fly direct to, say, Barcelona for a wedding in Spain rather than going via Madrid. That's the consumer market, and the business market has exploded in that time, also moving towards point-to-point as you describe. It seems that as any product becomes more of a commodity, customers put higher value on "convenience". Just a guess, from my own 60 years as an airline passenger.

[@blindleader42]

My first job out of university was on the 747-400 program. That was the single biggest modernization of that plane. It was an all new airplane that looked a lot like a 747. The winglets were the only obvious difference to the casual viewer.

[@curbowman]

My first job out of the aircraft technician school was on the then brand-new 747-400!! I already knew the previous incarnation, and I do agree: the -400 was a completely different bird.

[@Da-Creams]

Good video fly landed on your head at 14:34

[@trentmason009]

This was excellent. I felt like I was having a Sunday chat with a smart friend! I just wonder what types of geopolitical changes could happen to bring the "giants roaring back."

[@mysticrising1403]

Listening to him is like listening to a bedtime story ... comforting 🙏

[@robertlandau8]

Excellent job! Thanks for sharing your knowledge. It really helps to understand the way the airlines and airplane manufacturers think

[@garydunken7934]

3:24 that Delta 747 was on its last flight to aircraft graveyard in Arizona. Pretty sad to see it go.

[@historiccrystalkeyinn542]

It looked like Mojave California to me.

[@arealpersonuwu3828]

11:09 "it didn't *p a n* out" cheeky pan am reference.....so funny and yet so sad

[@shapman280]

That was a panny joke

[@youchris67]

The twin-engine 767 began the trend towards getting rid of four engine jets in the 1980s. Once the 777 came along and was such a huge success, this hammered the first nail into the coffin of four-engine passenger jets. Successful ETOPS certifications of the 767 and 777 said it all: Four-engine passenger jets have became instant dinosaurs.

[@WoodedAcres]

Well said.

[@michaeldougfir9807]

This video is why I visit Mentour. Good explanations, a bit of history, & business logic. Thank you!

[@danielelindsey2213]

I just love watching these videos because, is it Pippa?, is so likable. He is such a good teacher. I've learned so much. Love the way he says "Guys..." when talking to us.

[@josephgaviota]

Dear Mentour Pilot: You're very interesting, and informative. I'm enjoying your videos.

[@angielabelle9541]

Thank you for this segment! I wonder if anyone else remembers back when the A380 was first announced, Boeing announced a competitive response (sorry don't remember the name of it) and then a year or three later, once Airbus was fully committed to actually building the thing, announced that there was not enough demand worldwide, then or in the future, for super-jumbos and cancelled their supposedly-upcoming super-jumbo? Boeing place its bet on twin-engine widebodies designed for the upcoming direct-to ATC off-airways systems, which of course will kill the hub-and-spoke system required to support Super Jumbos. Now, I'm reading that 10 years after the introduction of the A380, sales are languishing- only Emirates and a couple of other really-long-haul airlines are even talking about buying any more and many of the companies that pre-ordered or ordered A380s have cancelled their orders. So I have to ask myself: did Boeing do this as a deception, a deliberate competitive ploy, announcing a competing Super Jumbo to spur Airbus onward until shortly after they had committed to build the A380, then suddenly cancelling the (imaginary?) Boeing rival... or did Boeing just have a better crystal ball back then than Airbus did? It's food for an interesting discussion, but as it turns out, Boeing was right and Airbus bet billions on a dwindling market segment that they predicted would boom and grow.

[@channelone4655]

There's been no new A380s ordered for a couple of years now. It's had its day. And it was too late for it.

[@lucijanpraprotnik]

Mentour Pilot your movie is so greta, you're speaking perfect fluently, like my cousin Marko Kralj, the main captain of Aribus A380 Emirates! I am so so proud of you! 👍🏼

[@roythurston7799]

Man with you it’s not just flight technology. You break everything down that has anything & everything with airplanes & aviation while keeping it interesting & informative . I also like the fact that you are a good & positive encouragement for people Who need help & guidance in their studies . Really enjoy your videos.

[@BluPrint77]

Recently discovered your channel, it's absolutely fantastic! :) Have watched so many of your videos already, just from an interested in aviation point of view. Would love to hear what you think on this type of aircraft, or any now we have faced a major global incident. One of the best and most informative channels out there. Pease keep the videos coming! Cheers!

[@darkshadow7709]

I absolutely LOVE your videos!

[@MentourPilot]

Thank you! That makes me so happy to hear!

[@30250623]

Four years later: Emirates is the most successful airline operating those jumbos

[@ronnrayy5449]

Not sure words like "the most successful airline" would be used to describe Emirates Lol. Making 3 billion in a year is great for them. But 3 billion is nothing for big airlines

[@30250623]

@@ronnrayy5449 most successfully airline in repsect of using jumbo jets Because most other airlines could not efficiently utilise jumbo jets compared to emirates

[@polduseri909]

The 747 was built primarily to be a freighter for the USAF, a competition Boeing lost to the C-5 Galaxy. Then ideas changed and PanAm suggestions came to further what will become a real icon on aviation history: The Jumbo. Also, the 747 still been built and may be more orders for the 8i will be placed: Lufthansa just announced that the A380 replacement will be that version. Agree that 4 engines planes will be history but appears that the last one flying will be the 747

[@dirkpretorius4314]

The 747 was also the prettiest commercial aircraft that ever flew our skies. Just my favorite. I am nostalgic about it. Even remember, as a young boy, I stood on the tarmac in front of that aircraft looking up, totally in awe.

[@rick7972]

What a GREAT KZbinr you are! THANKS for all you do!👍👍

[@ZiggyMercury]

Correct me if you think I'm wrong: I tend to think that the success of the A380 for Airbus shouldn't be measured solely in terms of direct financial gains; instead, I think it should probably be measured by combining the money Airbus received from selling it with the money Airbus received due to the good reputation it created for Airbus. When Airbus started working on the A380 in the late 80's or beginning of the 90's their market share was WAY smaller than Boeing's (~3-times smaller). About 20 years later (2010), Airbus' market share was practically equal to (and even a tiny bit higher than) that of Boeing. Now, I speculate that one of the (many) reasons has to do with the A380: the A380 is not just an aircraft, it's a statement: "anything Boeing can do, Airbus can do better". This, in turn, can make airlines more confident in choosing Airbus, and not Boeing, to be the major/only manufacturer of the planes in their fleet. No?

[@JohanMsWorld]

I only want to say one thing that you forgot here: ETOPS killed the behomoth. Johan.

[@FreedomTalkMedia]

Government: Always dicking with our lives.

[@stonebridge6489]

Well explained. In addition I think its a question of affordability. The Arab airlines such as Emirates, Qatar and Etihad have the money to afford these Jumbo jets, this is money most airlines in the world don't have. I have flown on Emirates and Qatar on their 787s on routes to USA and South Africa, their service in coach/economy class is amazing (excellent). If you compare the service in coach on most American airlines to either Qatar or Emirates you can see a clear difference as to which airlines have the money to provide you the best service. Just the amount and quality of meals and snacks provided by Qatar and Emirates in coach are far much more than you are provided on most U.S airlines. The amount and quality of free amenities provided by an airline tells you alot about what they can afford.

[@jamesclendon4811]

Maybe you can, but it will be made out of turkey.

[@dbcrosby39]

They are state airlines! The US could afford that to, if airlines were subsidized by the taxpayer!

[@mateuszzimon8216]

@@dbcrosby39 US don't subsidized airlines but order ultra costly jet fighters

[@thedyslexicorangutan8049]

flew on the Boeing 787 a couple times. Technologically advanced with the swept curving wings, the composite body that's able to endure higher cabin pressure, the beautiful interior that holds 3-5-3 columns, the quietness from the engines, and the button-activated dimming windows. Nicest plane I've been on

[@jeramykennedy6813]

Not a pilot, only taken 6; flights in my life just fascinated by planes and this guy is amazing the way he describes things

[@TheChudoviste]

11:47 most definately not.Maybe they would shut down an assembly line for the complete plane,but they will 100% make spare parts for existing ones for a decades to come.

[@BruceHoult]

I've flown Emirates A380 between Moscow and New Zealand and return about ten times in the last four years (all the way, in the last couple of years, on two or three A380 flights). In January my wife did it for the first time. "Just a plane" she said. This week she flew from Dubai to Auckland on an Emirates 777 (refuelling in Bali). Her reaction: "That was a big mistake! It was awful, the seat was tiny and uncomfortable, it was noisy -- I'm only going that far on an A380 in future!" Maybe the 787 is ok too ... I haven't been able to find anyone flying one on a route I've travelled yet.

[@TheNinjaMarmot]

787 good plane. Seats comparable to 380

[@jonathantan2469]

I flew on a 787 with Scoot Airlines. It's a budget airline owned by Singapore Air. I noticed it was quieter than the 777's or A330's I had usually flown on.

[@abdullahalshehri1793]

The focus now is on B777 and A350 , all of them doing great range and carrying good amount of passengers

[@MentourPilot]

Yeah, they are great Aircraft!

[@jeffcoat1959]

I have flown from the US to Japan twice, once on an A380, once on a 777. The A380 was by far the more comfortable aircraft. Much smoother and quieter ride. More seat space and leg room as well. (Economy class both trips)

[@DavidSmith-ee6df]

This is one of the best pilot videos out there. All power to our brother. He’s great.

[@thestockpickerchannel]

Quality explanation and I love the red pillows and the Buddha painting in the background as well. 😃

[@RayHardman7567]

Few years ago around the end of September, beginning of October, I took a flight from Houston to Seattle. It was a night flight, think last one for the day, but it was totally empty. I think out of the maybe 400 seats, less than 50 were taken. Quietest and most disturbing flight I've ever been on. But it was a lot roomier, so there's that.

[@rogerroger6049]

Mentour, A good talk but could you not have thrown the A340 in with the 747 and A380? And could you have mentioned the advent of "ETOPS" as helping to eliminate the larger 4 engined aircraft?

[@MentourPilot]

Yes, the 340 suffered the same problem. The ETOPS part is covered in the 3-engine video.

[@daddygates8290]

MaidenAirTM and it's such a beautifully aircraft.

[@glomph]

Because the A340 was a total abortion of a project, pretty much a 95% failure in the market. Like a horse designed by a committee becomes an elephant.

[@rogerroger6049]

Thanks for your response. I'm always interested in what you have to say. BTW here in Australia we have a shortage of pilots so I understand.

[@deadfreightwest5956]

Camel. A horse designed by committee is a camel. :)

[@elijahaywago7274]

Great stuff. Being a fan of Boeing, i wondered why they didn't compete with Airbus by making a big aeroplane the size of A380....now i know...

[@MentourPilot]

Yes! They bet on the right horse.

[@wilburfinnigan5627]

elijah BOEING is/was smarter than the scarebus, who let their egos get in the way of common sense !!!!

[@glomph]

One of the original concepts for the 747 **was** a double-deck A380-ish machine. The project manager, the legendary Joe Sutter (†2016) realized this was impractical, and got the design we all know & love into reality. The big killer was (as now with new planes!) the engine reliability. At initial product launch the engines were TERRIBLE. Fortunately Pratt & Whitney & others got their shit together and made the 747 the spectacular success it's been.

[@nuke9918]

Boeing already knew it wasn't going to pay off. At 1997 Airshow Boeing announced 3 new version of 747s. The 747-500 (as big as the 747-8i), the 747-600 that had the same MTOW of a A380 and the even more massive 747-700 85 meters long and a cross section 1.5 meters larger than the standard Jumbo... the result was really poor orders. At that point Boeing realized that planes even bigger than the 400 series wheren't going to sell. Airbus instead went for it... and they have to say a Big thank you to EMIRATES. Withouth them the A380 would have been a gigantic loss

[@fratex6790]

I can't stop watching your videos mate! Very very interesting channel!!!

[@vishalgoel360]

Good job mate!!

[@maldohh7451]

Thanks Mentour for the great video and hello from Dubai! Can you please do a video about how the 747 cargo planes manage to design their huge opening nose while keeping the plane pressurised?

[@Engineer9736]

Mohamad Al-Dah Probably a lot of very sturdy hydraulic locks i guess

[@maldohh7451]

Richard van Pukkem thank you

[@fanekoman8288]

I would love to see a new B757, but i think that is almost imposible to happen!

[@Dave_Sisson]

The A321 NEO is fairly similar to what an updated B757 MAX would be like. They are selling fairly well, but I'm not sure there is the demand for two aircraft of that size and range.

[@dmdx86]

The Boeing 797, if and when it comes out.

[@yoironfistbro8128]

The Boeing 797 will basically be a 767 but slightly smaller

[@fanekoman8288]

Computer kid totally true

[@fanekoman8288]

Dave Sisson yes you are right, never thought about that :/

[@Mr-tl4sg]

The A380 is the reason I only fly Emirates out of Sydney to Europe. The B777 with its 10 seats across is total garbage, I have seen so many passengers complain, even one guy sitting next to the window complained of claustrophobia and had to move. These tiny seats are only suitable for low cost carriers for short distances. And for the record I am thin build.

[@wilburfinnigan5627]

IOS Hey dumb ass !!! The plane manufacturer has NOTHING to do with the seating arrangement !!! It is the AIRLINES !!!!!!

[@Mr-tl4sg]

Nice language dude. That's right the carriers dictate the configuration and if you check the majority configuration is 10 seats across where once there were 9 seats so the probability is that if you go on any B777 you will get a small seat. Bye

[@adrianpeterspeters6149]

Wilbur Finnigan airbus designed there cabin width so the airlines could not put 10 for 9 seats across, as you so rightly point out, I have flown on a boeing 777 and wish never to do so again, but looks like it will happen,AIRBUS Please ,not american products that totally disregard the purpose of reality,er,that is the passenger......

[@wilburfinnigan5627]

Adrianpeters Guess you better not take any long distance flights then !!! The AIRLINES decide how to configure the interiors of planes !! DUUUUUUHHHH!!!!!!!!

[@wilburfinnigan5627]

IOS and if you went on a Scarebus of that same airline you would get the same seats !!! DUUUUHH!!!!!!!!!

[@hgradyspruce1975]

Excellent explanation. have made many trips overseas but unfortunately never on 747 or 380 but have traveled on 777 and 787. thanks good job

[@ChoySekMunSimon]

Thanks for a very illuminating talk about these large airliners.

[@leopold2427]

Most confortable airplane is the A380 . I only travel economy.... less claustrophobic, less noise, and you hardly feel the movements including the turbulences... My very favorite so far. Yes the hub aspect is terribly relevant if you believe that building 2 smaller planes is cheaper than buying and maintaining a jumbo size. Mostly I suspect historical trade wars between Boeing and Airbus. US airlines were probably convinced to boycott the A380. This is dirty business with dirty politics. Not new. Thank you so much for your post.

[@ianpearson8976]

can you are correct.787 has not much room and often is poor experience compared to a380.

[@leopold2427]

Erich , point taken , but when you are over the Atlantic for 6 hours , there’s not so many airports around , except Iceland which accommodates the A380. And ...Seriously, I would rather have a 4 engine airplane than just equipped 2, but it’s just me, I guess...

[@MrDanisve]

Erich Weiler If you need to go down, you will go down even if runway lacks a few meters. Hell even the hudson river is a nice runway if you need. Aswell as someone pointed out, 4 engines. Alot of things to go wrong for that too be without power. Lets say the flock of geese hit 2 engines, 737 would be without power. A380 can still climb. Safety more engines are allways better, however its not economic :P

[@JoseJimenez-sh1yi]

Léo Pold wrong, they did not the 747-8 either

[@pwilkesful]

@@leopold2427 Iceland is destined to become the terminal for all transatlantic flights because it is closer to Europe than New York.

[@wildbill7267]

In the USA, the spoke & hub model is still going strong. I wish there was more point to point. Layovers blow

[@CockatooDude]

Yeah for real. I had a flight to Vancouver from Atlanta and there were *two* layovers on the route, there and back. That can't possibly be more economical than a direct flight, and yet all the direct flights were at least 100 dollars more.

[@jeremiahjohnson6082]

Maybe with the advent of smaller electric aircraft in a spoke and hub system , the biggees will again come back into their own

[@CockatooDude]

@bob wach I wasn't complaining. I got to my destination after all. I am just saying that there is probably a more economical way for airlines to solve these issues.

[@CockatooDude]

@bob wach I understand where you are coming from, the logistics of airline management are among the most complex systems in business. However in Europe, where jet fuel is significantly more expensive, there are direct flight airfares which go as low as 10 euros. So if they can do that, I don't understand why a direct flight in America should cost so much more than an indirect one. After all it's not like the seats wouldn't be filled between two major airports, and the planes have the range for it. I could understand one layover in Toronto, as that is also a major city, but there was another one in Calgary, which is very strange to me. I guess the traffic from Toronto to Calgary isn't that great so they get combine the flights like that. But, that said, there's always a better way. The airline industry is somewhat slow at adopting new technologies, as it takes forever for them to get implemented across the board. For something like using a reinforcement learning algorithm to optimize flight routes and pricing however the airline wouldn't have any implementing to do, they'd just have to change their schedules around once. I am sure that a direct flight from Atlanta to Vancouver (and other routes) can be made far less expensive than 500 dollars, there is the demand for it after all.

[@grizzlygrizzle]

If you buy tickets like a week before your flight, from a booking website that fills empty seats, there's no telling what you'll end up with. A recent flight was a 43-hour ordeal, including 11.5-hour and 12-hour layovers.

[@victorinodelacruz3603]

Thank you so much... Very interesting topic .. very informative 😃😃😃

[@sp1nrx]

The king of point-to-point flight: Southwest Airlines and all with Boeing 737s.....

[@glomph]

Most successful airframe in history.... they just crank them out here in the Renton(Seattle) factory. Fascinating to see the fuselages come in on special rail cars daily from the Boeing Wichita plant.

[@EMichaelBall]

Southwest may be the king, but Ryanair is the master of the business model.

[@julosx]

This business will crumble down in the next few years, big days for Ryanair are over. Too much public money sent to tax heavens. People (i.e. tax payers) are increasingly fed up with this shit.

[@cryogeneric]

Many have criticized Southwest for taking the mystique out of air travel, but it was more their ability to adapt in an uncertain and evolving market post-911. As far as I know, they don't fly internationally, but they've got the american market down by converting air travel into essentially "bus-travel" in the sky. It's not glamorous, but it works and it's allowed more and more people to travel.

[@livefree223]

I work for BNSF which runs that Renton train out of its Interbay terminal. Worked that job a few times as well as taking some of those Boeing cars over the road. The BNSF/Boeing relationship is pure logistical magic once you've seen it a bit from the inside.

[@AnakinSkyobiliviator]

Aw, I'm gonna miss the big fellas..

[@MentourPilot]

Me to...

[@danielkorladis7869]

I dunno... they're cool, but sitting in the middle section of coach in a 747 kinda sucks.

[@s4dg]

nope i dont like the 747 it looks un flight worthy

[@themopedmetallist]

Who's in for C-5 conversions? Even the Econ pax could take their cars along for the trip

[@berthayling1032]

Speaking of C5 conversions -- sort of -- the USAF recently did a big upgrade and re-engine project on the C5s, bringing some of them out of mothballs and hanging new military spec variants of GE's CF6 on 'em to make the C5M Super Galaxy.

[@Asif-fw4ld]

58 years and counting, of the legacy of the queen of the skies, and she is still an all time favorite. Wish 747s still rule the skies for many more years to come.

[@MentourPilot]

Me to!

[@navynightranger6517]

Agreed

[@jimsonbrown9768]

Only as a freighter.

[@Strunz0]

Boeing doesn't want to let it die and they're paying through the nose for it. The last passenger models being built are Air Force Ones and there's only a dozen or so freighters left to be built

[@SteveJohnson-SD70MAC-747]

Really enjoy this video series and find it somewhat addicting. Videos are well presented, informative, and very entertaining. Only a few more 747s left to be made.

[@gastonmarturet5473]

Man... You are so good!! Thanks for your dedication!!! I love the 747 and I hope to see her flying for so many many years!!!

[@AirAttackTransit]

Very sad to see those 747s disappearing, can't see much at the airport anymore :( They're a glorious flying machine!

[@MentourPilot]

True! The “Queen if the sky” is one of my absolute favorites.

[@AirAttackTransit]

I agree!

[@Shadowfax-1980]

Passenger versions are going away, but you should still be able to see the freighter versions. UPS just ordered several more.

[@AirAttackTransit]

Yeah, still glad they have 747s as freight service. So I guess they're not really dead :P

[@cageordie]

You can't mention the 25 billion dollar (not Euro, found the source) cost of the A380 without mentioning the $32 billion cost of the Boeing 787 program, which Boeing will also never recoup. Both of those were problem programs. The A350 program went as designed and has only now been running for 8 years at a cost of €11 billion. The latest 777 program is going well and will produce an aircraft that seats 4 more than the 747-8, 414 compared to 410 in real world configurations. The difference in economy achieved by two large engines instead of four smaller (still massive) engines is impossible to ignore too. The 777-9 doesn't even fit on a standard aircraft stand without folding its wing tips, it is bigger in span than the A380.

[@MentourPilot]

Yeah I have a separate video on the 777X. And this video was mainly about the jumbos.

[@vladimirtchuiev2218]

I dunno, the 787 seems pretty successful and many companies run those, unlike the A380...

[@n.davidlessani8243]

cageordie m Mm

[@lightningshy5287]

I hope to at least once in my lifetime be able to fly on a 747 before it dies out as a passenger jet 😢

[@Satopi3104]

I’ve been flying ny to Tokyo regularly since I was 3 months old and I remember loving flying in the double deckers (was not and still not enough of a airplane geek to know what plane it was but given both us and Japanese airlines seem to use Boeing, I assume it was the 747). As someone who cannot sleep in aircraft even if I am in business, finding stuff to do on the 14 hour flight is always an issue. I remember some flights were really empty and this was pre 9/11 and everything was just more relaxed. So I would walk up and down the super long aisles, walk up and down the stairs, just sit on the stairs, etc. Even in economy, that ability to just move around made the flight bearable. I have not flown a long haul (over 9 hours by my definition) In economy since like… 10 years ago, maybe, and while I enjoy the flights (especially ANA’s The Room) it still feels so cramped in these smaller aircraft (and to be clear, these are 777s so basically as big as they go these days). The ceilings are lower, the aisles are narrow, there are no empty spaces you can just stand around and stretch and stuff. I could not fly economy long haul in these actually small aircraft *shudders.

[@mrbear2728]

You have THE BEST speaking voice ever ❤❤❤....hahaha..Keeps the attention for sure! Very informative too. Love watching your videos ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

[@ZurichAirportSpotter]

Very well explained video. The A380... actually not that unsuccessful for an aircraft of that size in terms of orders. 350 units is quite remarkable, there's only one 747 version which has been sold more (747-400). The big problem which Airbus is facing are the immense development costs. Will it have a chance for a comeback? I personally think that there is and will be a market for an A380neo in about 10 years or so. Despite point-to-point is going to expand even further, the airports of the latgest cities will remain highly congested. Thinking about the expected growth of air travel the A380 could be the aircraft to go for the routes between those airports (like LHR-JFK). A re-engined aircraft can be quite "cheap" to develop (like the A330neo for instance). Convincing UAE, QTR, BAW, maybe DLH and some asian carriers, I think there is potential. But well, the next decade will show us how big this potential is going to be.

[@MentourPilot]

Yes, that’s why I said that in the end. We can never really know, but it’s looking dark for the A380 right now

[@redlock4004]

This might happen, sort of like the demand for the b757 increased after it went out of production. The problem with that, in this case, is that the a380 will be obsolete as a commercial aircraft by then unless a large sum of money is spent to upgrade it. That expense will be difficult to justify with the past level of debt the plane carries and the built in lack of efficiency of four engines.

[@jasoncavitt2043]

Good vid, Mentour. Also, good post, Zurich, but there's a problem with your figures. There are actually 331 total orders for the A380, with 228 delivered as of July 2018, and 41 "likely to be canceled." The true firm order backlog is 62-with Emirates accounting for 58 of those-putting the projected deliveries tally at 290. Ultimately, the legacy of the A380 will be one of total dependence upon a single airline. The 747, on the other hand, is the Queen of the Skies.

[@k2midnight928]

ZurichAirportSpotter many of the orders and options to buy were cancelled as airlines can only fly them to a very limited number of airports due to there size. To accommodate the A380 airports have to spend millions in able to expand its runways and gates so most airports have opted to not allow its use not to mention its massive wake turbulence it creates causes other aircraft to wait for quite a bit of time before they can land or takeoff so that starts to limit the number of flights into those airports. The Airlines who operate them are having trouble filling enough seats to justify it’s operational costs. If those facts are not enough to bring the line to a close the nail in its coffin would be the down time and continues maintenance issues there having finding micro cracks all over its structure. At this point the plane no matter how grand it seems is surely doomed to fail to keep its production going.

[@b1squitz551]

Initially Airbus was looking to the asian market to sell the A380 (it's called 380-800 because 8 is a lucky number in Asia) thinking that in the years after much more people would start to fly (only China has 1Bil people). The asian market didn't order much 380s, they prefer the much more efficient 777s and 350s. I think that the 330s and the new MoM would be the perfect airplanes for the african market (not developed yet)

[@srinitaaigaura]

The next generation of narrow bodies really need the features in the Dreamliner or the A350 if they're going to go for so long - windows, air pressure, mood lighting... I remember flying on Old 737s on short haul flights in India, and the airconditioning was so bad I smelt some kerosene and felt like some carbon monoxide was in my blood by the time I landed. The longest I ever flew in a 737 NG was Malaysian, to Singapore and Bali, and that was much better, but still the Dreamliner was in a totally other category - fresh as a daisy.