A380--airports will spend millions to accomodate
 

Please see this article if you have time. If not, I will give a summary below.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TRAVEL/02/15....ap/index.html

Basically what it says is that it will take millions dollars to rennovate the airports in order to accomodate the A380. Runways will need to be widened, and terminals will need upgraded to unload these double-decker planes more easily. Overpasses will have to be rennovated as the existing ones might not be able to support the weight of the A380. Also these planes could interfere with other planes landing.

Another concern I have is the emergency evacuation of an A380. As some of you know from my thread, I was involved in an incident on British Airways about 6 months ago where we had to evacuate a plane due to an engine catching fire while we were in the air. It was scary enough to evacuate a Boeing 777, I can only imagine what a stampede it would be to evacuate a fully-loaded A380.

When I first heard about the A380 I thought is was a great idea. There were already concerns about evacuation, but at that time I had never evacuated an airplane before and I was sure it would never happen to me. I know evacuations are rare, but they DO happen.

Given what I have learned today about the cost to the airports, combined with my concerns about evacuation, I am having serious doubts that the A380 is a good thing. I welcome other opinions and your input. Thanks.

Docks, terminals and airports have always needed renovation over the course of time to adapt to changing craft that arrived and departed from there.

Best wishes,

Rex

True, airports will always need rennovation. But is it worth it for only one type of plane?

I can understand your concern about evacuating an aircraft with a large number of people aboard. However, I think the "safety" issues involved would have as much to do with the procedures in place and the ability to CONTROL a larger number of people as with the size of the aircraft itself.

I am sure you can imagine what would have happened to passenger aviation as we know it if when the DC-7 came along and replaced the DC-3 if people had said, "we shouldn't have this aircraft; it is too large..." etc., etc.

From your own experience I'd say we need to fix more than just some runways and jetways.

As far as cost for upgrades, I really dont see that as a problem. Innovation requires change, we are moving forward and that is just part of it.

I understand your concern about evacuation. I investigated a bit and here is what I found. A typical Airbus A380 seats 555 people on two decks. There are 6 emergency exits on the upper deck and 10 on the lower deck for a total of 16 or 1 exit per 35 people. A 777 has 10 exits and seats 368 people in a typical 3 class configuration for a total of 1 exit per 37 people. So its about the same. Also the A380 will go through the following security test by the FAA:

Before the new Airbus A380 can be certified to carry passengers, Airbus must demonstrate to regulatory authorities in the United States and Europe that the maximum number of passengers the plane will carry can be evacuated within 90 seconds. For the demonstration later this year, Airbus is expected to have more than 850 seats on the two decks of the A380.

1. Only the plane’s internal emergency lighting system can provide illumination.

2. Exterior light level can be no greater than 0.3 foot-candle.

3. Each crew member must be seated in the normally assigned seat.

4. Passenger load must be representative with at least 40 percent female; 35 percent over 50 years old; at least 15 percent must be female and over age 50. Three life-size dolls (not included in total passenger load) must be carried by passengers to simulate live infants 2 years old or younger.

5. Passengers must have seat belts on when drill starts.

6. Passengers can’t know the location of the emergency exits to be used.

7. Only half of the emergency slides/doors can be used.

8. Before start of drill, about one half of the total average amount of carry-on baggage, blankets, pillows and other similar articles must be distributed at several locations in aisles and emergency exit access ways to create minor obstructions.

9. No practice runs are allowed before the drill.

10. Evacuation test is over when the last person on the plane, including crew members, is on the ground.

90 SECONDS TO ESCAPE FAA REQUIREMENTS FOR EVACUATION DRILL DECEMBER CHANGES TO FAA REQUIREMENTS

1. Slides can be deployed before the drill begins, but doors inside the plane must be covered so passengers do not know which will be used in the drill.

2. Low-level light can be used outside the plane during the test.

They said the same thing about the 747 when it was announced. Airports should take this as an opportunity to perform some much-needed renovations and expansions. And really, in the U.S. anyway, how many airports will even see an A380 - LAX, SFO, JFK, O'Hare perhaps. It probably will have a much bigger impact on the European BIg 4 - Heathrow, CDG, FRA, AMS - and definitely on the Asian airports.

P_M - I also share your concerns about the safety of the A380.

I also wonder just how long it will take for all the passengers to board the plane, and once at its destination, how long will it take everyone to get off and (especially) to get their luggage. In the past two years, I have been on a number of 2-3 hour flights where it took me the same amount of time to exit the plane, claim my luggage and leave the airport as it did to fly there. I hesitate to think how long the process will take with a plane the size of the A380.

"All things change and we must change with them..."

Without sounding like a milly-molly-mandy management trainer, this issue is going to separate the commercial sheep from the bureaucrat goats.

Airports run on proper commercial lines have no problem finding capex to invest in improvements. The really well managed ones have cash pouring out of their ears.

Now there's no law of nature that says it has to take three hours to embark a full load on a plane. The other day, I got on a train that arrived late at its originating station. 250 people got on that train, sat down, opened their papers in comfort and without haste - and the train was on its way within 5 mins of arrival. Properly designed airports could achieve similar - though obviously not identical - embarkation (and disembarkation) times - with faster turnround times and, as a result more passenger throughput.

More passengers means more landing fees and more revenue from turnover rents from airport retailing. Investing in better jetways etc makes money.

Airports that are run like businesses (as BAA and Changi are) will invest. Those that are run like part of the civil service won't. It really is that simple.

You will board and deplane via two jetways so it should take no longer than normal.

We should limit all planes to 125 people. Since the major airports are close to landing and takeoff capacity that would mean many fewer people would be able to travel to Europe which would make hotels, restaurants, museums, etc. much less crowded.

I say we all refuse to fly aboard any A380 and let our voices be heard. Bigger is not always better.

You have all brought up interesting points and I appreciate that. MorganB, your detailed info on the safety drill helps tremendously to put my mind at ease. I'm impressed that they are doing such a great job of simulating a real evacuation, right down to the age of passengers. It's good that they had the forethought to not allow all emergency exits to be used. When I evacuated the 777, we were only allowed to use the right side exits, as the firefighters were still putting out the fire on the left side of the plane.

Thanks again for all of your replies.

I have to say that I really enjoy flying the 747 long hauls, so I'm interested to see what it would be like on one of these. It seems like with all the extra people on board, that it would feel more cramped, but I haven't found that to be the case. Because of the extra height and width of the fuselage, to me the 747-400 almost seems to feel a little like an auditorium.

Oddly, I haven't noticed a tremendous time difference deplaning a 747 than I have a 777, even without dual jetways. And this after a 16 hour segment on the 747 vs half that on the 777. Not sure if that's the case, but it hasn't really seemed much different.

As a retired Boeing QA supervisor, I volunteered to do the emergency evacuation deployment from the upper deck of a 747, and I must say, as one not given to fear of heights, I still hesitated at the door, before I flung myself onto the slide,when it is done in darkness, the fear of the uknown comes into play as well, so I think, when those folks look out that door, into virtual darkness, and see the height that they are at, they also will hesitate! and those seconds of hesitation will add up!and I think this mistake of an airplane will fail!.

The International Herald Tribune pointed out, in a recent article by Don Philips, that many of those airport modifications, which will indeed accommodate the super-jumbo Airbus, were needed anyway.

Those of us old enough remember just the same stuff about the 747 !

How long will it take to board? Will it be safe with so many people ? Will the airports cope ? Plus of course images of on board shopping malls, lounges and gyms, and restaurants, it really is 'deja view' to the whole 747 introduction.

I am sure there are those who could tell us the same about 707 / DC8 which came in to carry 150 + passengers.

I doubt that many will initially be seen in Europe, Asia will probably be see most of the new flights.

sorry ' deja vu'..

As for renovations - keep in mind, the airports have several years to do the reno's, and don't have to renovate ALL gates. If there will only be a few A380 planes arriving they will probably only need to install 2nd-storey loading ramps on a few gates to start; then it becomes a scheduling issue.

I was most impressed with the loading of a 747 jumbo in Schipol (AMS), where we were handed coloured cards when we went thru the second security at the waiting lounge. they loaded in order by card colour, which was determind by howfar you were from one of 2 loading ramps. Planning is a wonderful thing. This is so much neater than just dividing the passengers into 2 or 3 categories and having some bozo block the whole aisle for half the passengers.

I would be amazed if any overpass designed for a 747 couldn't hold a 380. Perhaps they were designed for 707's and are pushing it to hold a 747?

I would like to add to my first post, anyone who thinks airlines will have gyms, saunas, hair salons, shops etc,.. on board the 380, will be sadly mistaken,airlines are in the business of carrying people from A-B for a cheap as posible, I remeber when Japan airlines had a fountain, with water! on the upper deck of the first 747-100s, that soon went away! as fuel cost go skyward, these planes will resemble cattle cars, they will maximise the seating, Oh! there will be the exceptions, like Virgin, who will sell that type of survice, and there will be passengers (wealthy) who will look for that type of service, but for the general population, who wants to get from A-B as quickly as possible, I am afraid it will be elbow to elbow, with little frills, and BORING.