Comments:
The behemoths of the skies still exist… ✈️
Been a while, since I flew in one of these 😊🤷🏻♂️ But it’s still a pleasure, as they tend to be amongst the smoothest and quietest aircraft I have experienced. Who knows how long we will continue seeing the A380s in the skies 🧐
LH could slowly think of refurbishing the cabins, though 😉
That would keep them interesting for longer…
I especially enjoy the quietness (which at least to my ears is still quieter than most twins) and if the rest of the cabin catches up… 🤞🏻👍🏻
LH is refurbishing their cabins very slowly...
They're still catching up from the delays on cabin parts from the pandemic. Lufthansa Technik has promised to retrofit the cabins of their older airplanes with the new "Allegris" interior. Which supposedly is going to be very good. Lufthansa is still not 100% certain of how long they'll keep the A380 so there are less plans to refurbish A380 cabins. They're focusing primarily on 777s, 787s, A350s, and oddly 747s first for their Allegris cabin. The A380 is very quiet, especially on the upper deck. BUT the A380 does not have the cabin humidity and higher oxygen levels that the newest generation aircraft like the A350 and the B787 have - so if you can get a quieter seat on the A350/B787 you are likely better off.
Fortunately my flights on the 380…
Were upstairs. Somehow I never had a flight in the 787 🤷🏻♂️
The 747-8 was also nice IMHO 👍🏻
The 747-8 was also nice IMHO 👍🏻
787 is a great airplane for passenger comfort!
I would say the 787 is the finest plane when it comes to comfort for biologicals. I say biologicals because even dogs, cats, and horses seem to prefer the 787. I personally feel a slight difference between the 787 and the A350 - I think I feel better in a 787. Although this is not a perfect comparison - as the passengers, route, and airline are not all the same which may contribute to an imperfect objectivity.
So the question becomes... Why doesn't every airline switch to the 787? And why do passengers think the A350 and the 787 are competitor aircraft but the airlines consider the A350 and 777 to be competitive aircraft and consider the 787 a class in its own? Especially when the 787 carries nearly the same amount of passengers as a 777/A350 and is supposedly 20% more fuel efficient.
So I asked an Emirates executive who gave me some basic information. And I realized that I made a lot of assumptions. He told me the following:
1. While it is true the 787 and A350 share many similarities as both are the only two carbon fiber bodied planes, and I can see why passengers assume these two planes are competitive; the A350 is definitely seen as a competitor to the 777 despite the 777 being aluminum bodied.
2. The reason why the 777 is still very favorable for airlines is because its total payload in weight is much higher than a 787. So while a 787 is 20% more fuel efficient from a per passenger seat perspective, that advantage drops dramatically once cargo is factored. Airlines make more money on cargo than passengers sometimes. So the ability to carry cargo is important and valuable.
3. The A350 is slightly larger than the 787 in terms of passenger capacity and has a lot higher total weight payload, meaning it can carry more cargo. The carbon fiber hull of the A350 also contributes to the fuel efficiency as well. So to many airlines, this may be the sweet spot. You've got better fuel efficiency, similar to 777 in passenger seating, and similar to 777 in total weight payload.
4. So then I asked why doesn't every airline just switch to an A350? And the response was much more complex and touched politics, government influences, Airbus' capacity to deliver so many planes, diversification, etc.
I was humbled...
I thought I knew a lot. I read the financial reports of all the major airlines. I recalled the financial details faster than Wall Street airline analysts. But I never knew the part about cargo and the 777's ability to carry a lot of cargo and the 787's inability to carry as much cargo. And with the air cargo business accelerating so much - that's a big deal! Humbled humbled humbled. Just goes to say... We should never think we know a lot about a subject as an outside analyst.
Excellent details!
I've only ever flown twice on a 787, a roundtrip between LA and Europe using Norwegian Airlines, and it was a genuinely good experience. I look forward to being a passenger on that plane again, as well as others........
B787 is definitely a nice plan to ride.
The cabin's humidity, simulated altitude, and oxygen density is much higher on the 787 and A350 because these planes are carbon fiber skinned. The stronger skin allows the cabin to be pressurized at a lower altitude equivalent. Overall, the 787 and A350 have a cabin altitude simulating 6000 feet or less (max 6000 feet, usually much less on average). On other metal bodied airliner planes, the cabin altitude is simulated at 8000 feet or less. While that isn't a significant difference, remember, Denver is where the athletes go to train. Denver is about 5000 feet elevation. Santa Fe, New Mexico is about 7000 feet! But I don't see as many athletes going to Santa Fe!
The A380 is the only commercial aircraft where you can take a shower at 35K feet.
I call that comfort.