Market doesn't seem to care much for the really large passenger jets any longerNot even any mention of the 747, though they did secure a deal for their cargo carrying version

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Password	(For file and post deletion.)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf Max filesize is 8 MB. Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000. You may upload 5 per post.

File: 1435016048266.png (81.5 KB, 395x631, 395:631, Screenshot_10.png)

Anonymous 06/22/15 (Mon) 23:34:08 No.93

Market doesn't seem to care much for the really large passenger jets any longer

Not even any mention of the 747, though they did secure a deal for their cargo carrying version

Anonymous 06/25/15 (Thu) 07:08:42 No.94

I think it makes sense. There are only so many routes that have the volume to justify such large aircraft, everyone already has what they need. Also, perhaps more frequent flights with smaller loads are more profitable.

Anonymous 07/02/15 (Thu) 11:45:22 No.95

>>94

As I recall the a380's development was motivated primarily by the "hub and spoke" concept of airline operation which was at the time though to become dominant.

In the end however the market has evolved instead to make great use of smaller and shorter flights which delights me greatly since it means smaller airports thrive where wide-bodies can't go.

BMA in Stockholm for example was faced with possible closure a couple years ago but that was shot down when it became obvious to all involved (apart from the moronic greens) that it filled an important niche