Glad to see Boeing doing better.

Is Boeing still based in Washington? If so does this benefit Gregoire, the questionably elected governor of Washington?

Boeing moved its corporate headquarters to Chicago about 6 years ago. The assembly line(s) are still in WA. But much work in done elsewhere now, including overseas (to help win foreign contracts).

Airbus is caught in a bit of a grinder now - to compete with the new 787, it has to decide if it can upgrade a current design (new wing and new engines) or start from scratch. If no one buys its upgrade, it will be forced to do a lot of new design and testing, right on top of all it has done to build the A380 (the double-decker which supposedly will make its debut flight today or tomorrow).

One has to wonder what Airbus was thinking with the A380, just from a customer service point of view. It'll probably take an hour or more just to board the thing. Half an hour to unboard. Who knows how long to load and unload the luggage, which means you'll have to have longer layovers to allow for connections. What airline would think that that's what the customer wants?

And no runways to take it.

The first A380 takeoff for the public was all over the news this morning, and in general, the TV folks were lapping up the spin that airports all over the world are revamping their runways and terminals to meet the demands of this wonderful new plane. they just forgot to mention that "all over the world" as of now includes, I believe, only three U.S. airports, and that bording and deplaning 800 people at a time is still going to be a logistical nightmare no matter how much facilities are improved.

Time for the Cohen plan: the passenger compartment is mounted on a sled and, before flight time, is inside the terminal. People have access to their seats from all sides and are seated as they arrive. All airliners come with flip up noses, and at flight time the passenger compartment slides right into the plane.

Loading and unloading is fast, turn around is fast, cleaning is fast and the airframe is much more productive.

And you could have it separate from the craft and paRACHUTE DOWN IN CASE OF ENGINE PROBLEMS.

OJ:

And now runways to take it.

Wrongish--as in you have the conclusion right, but the details wrong.

To be completely factual, all runways will take it. But some taxiways, most ramps, and all gates will not.

As John notes, within the US, only JFK and LAX (IIRC) even have A-380 modification plans in place.

I believe the (muy spendy) gate modification provides four embarking/debarking points, which, in theory, relieves that part of the logistical nightmare.

But for anyone who has been through customs (this excludes OJ, who greets travel with all the stoic fortitude for which pre-teen girls are famous) knows, dumping 800 folks at a whack on them will make getting off the airplane seem a doddle in comparison.

Not if the FAA doesn't certify it.

"I believe the (muy spendy) gate modification provides four embarking/debarking points, which, in theory, relieves that part of the logistical nightmare."

That's quite a theory. I doubt anyone ever asked gate agents for the airlines how this would work. You take 4 different boarding gates for a single flight, throw in 800 passengers who are exhausted, hassled, not paying attention, some don't speak the language, and what fraction will go to the "correct" gate? Sheesh. If one wants to destroy the air travel industry, the A380 sounds like the way to go...

Jeff, what are the overseas and cargo markets for this?

Aw, what would (international) air travel be without some chaos?

I arrived in Beijing once (on a NW 747) right in front of another jumbo. It wasn't so bad getting off the plane, but picking up baggage took about 45 minutes. Doesn't seem like much of a wait to me, not after flying for 13 hours. Talk to your friends, make some new friends, walk around and stretch a bit. At least the passport lines had enough agents and booths to keep things moving.

I have come into MIA a couple of times when they were understaffed. That was chaos, and many of the Customs folks didn't even have the good English.

Went thru Miami in 94 coming back from Cayman.

Went down into a hole, immediately hoped there wasn't a fire. No way out.

Think about it, though: that sucker's big enough to run a TRAIN inside whilst flying. Best of both worlds, no?

Did I just have a nasty thought, ghostcat.

Metaphorically speaking? I suppose so. I suppose I did, too!

I'm still chuckling about oj's modified spoonerism yesterday. Something about sucking the fun. Hot stuff!

I'll be good now.

Joe: I think both Fed Ex and UPS have ordeed a couple of these beasts. I think the real issue is how many seats these things are going to have when they all coach, 30 in pitch 17 in wide? 950? 1,000? The real market is the Mecca run. Just imagine it. a scene out of Dante. No stewardesses in minskirts passing out free drinks. Guards in wrap around shades with AK47s.

Joe:

My expertise is more in following the three basic rules of aviation (don't get lost, don't panic, and if you are going to land short, add power).

With that caveat, I wouldn't be surprised if this thing ends up as a freighter.

Absent the Mecca run, I don't see that many destinations requiring any kind of frequency with that many people. And without frequency, the pro-rated infrastructure upgrade costs start looking pretty ugly.

Even uglier than Eric Roberts. Or is it Julia?

No matter.

Jeff and Robert: thanks. David: what you're describing already exists for C-5s, sort of : it's basically a pallet with seats bolted to it that slides in (cargo deck is rollerized) & locks just like a regular cargo pallet. Unfortunately they don't let you load them with passengers first...