3 ms·

At that point the A380 will be a 30-40 year old design, and won't be competitive anymore.

• wahern 8y ago
  Road transportation accounts for ~50% of oil consumption. In 20 years most cars may be electric. And if renewables continue growing such that oil consumption isn't simply shifted to power plants, the fuel inefficiency of the A380 may matter much less. Also, the shift to point-to-point can only grow so much before the fuel efficiencies of the 787 and A350 come into equilibrium with the density of the A380. Moreover, most of the world continues to flock to mega cities. As cities expand airport usage increases while simultaneously making it more costly to expand or build airports. But 20 years, let alone 40 years, is a long ways out; who knows what will transpire. That said, the 777 is 25 years old and still dominating. At 30 and 35 years it still may be dominating even as the 777X slowly replaces it. A 30-year-old A380 may still be no less relevant, if not more relevant, than today.
• nexuist 8y ago
  I think aviation probably has a huge time-to-market compared to almost every other technology field; the B-52 first flew in 1952 and is scheduled to be decommissioned around 2050 (!) Aircraft bought today will be in service for at least several decades; it wouldn't be profitable for airlines to dump cash into them otherwise.
  • avar 8y ago
    A380 development started in earnest in 2000, it first flew in 2005. It seems reasonable that we could have a jumbo jet designed in 2035 fly in 2040. The B52 is still flying, but a bomber doesn't need to be economical to operate like an airliner has to. The US military can't be said to have a limited fuel budget. Sure, airliners operate for decades, but when they're bought they're state of the art. The A380 isn't economical to operate now.