Yes, it's not as if Boeing every had any development delays *cough*V-22 Osprey*cough* in any of their aircraft programs.

You're surprised that the government program is an ineffective boondoggle?

The Osprey was a co-production with Bell Hellicopter, created in large part because Jim Wright wanted a big defense contract for his Fort Worth district, more than the military actually wanted the thing or thought it was practical. So in that way, it was like the A-380 -- a government-sponsored aircraft that served the needs of government more than it served the needs of the people who were actually going to use it (and at this rate, The Federation is going to invent the matter transporter before Airbus gets its ueberjumbo off the ground).

Let's wait and see. The plane will be around for a long time, current glitches aside the plane is a very solid design.

With the congestion at the major hubs - NIMBY and so on - the airlines will need to maximize the passengers per limited landing and take-off slots. The number of point-to-point connections will increase, and offer increasing business for the Boeing Dreamlines, too, but there's plenty of business for everyone.

It can't land anywhere that voters have a say, which means it's doomed.

Some US airports have already started making changes to get ready for the A380 (as I recall, LAX, Dulles, and SFO). If there is a battle over landing the A380, it will be at O'Hare, but that airport has much bigger problems than the A380.

The issues involved are not things the "public" would notice (other than the cost) - beefing up the runways and taxiways, and raising (also lengthening) the jetways at a couple of gates to handle the higher doors. Most airports that might see the A380 would probably only get a flight or two a day, so there won't be much impact anyway.

Other issues have more impact on the taxpayer - like the decision at MIA to shut down Concourse A for 18 months because the airport authority is years behind on a major construction project and can't finish it without completely closing the terminal. Or the baggage handling system at the new Denver airport that was finally abandoned after wasting probably $500 million dollars (maybe more - I'm too lazy to check the exact figure). So now they route the baggage the old-fashioned way. Or the business problems at the Pittsburgh airport, which built a mall on the security side of the operation, only to watch things collapse after 9/11, when only ticketed passengers could go through to the airside.