I presume you are correct about having the Asian airlines in mind and it certainly sounds logical. However, somebody at Airbus is intelligent enough to know that the Asian carriers would want to serve LAX with the beast. Airbus should have approached the airport to see if there would be any problems with the size of the aircraft, instead of designing it first, starting production and then trying to cram it down the throats of LAX and other airports that simply don't have the spacing available between runways and runways, runways and taxiways, taxiways and taxiways, etc. Gate hold room sizes are yet another additional problem as you state. The beast will probably take up two or three gate apron areas due to the wingspan. No wonder this thing is unloved. I fail to see how shops will benefit from passengers getting off the A380. After a long-ass flight they'll want to clear Immigrations/Customs and get the hell out of the airport to a hotel to recuperate from the flight. The last thing on their minds will be shopping inside the terminal. Jose Prize Fan of reality In a message dated 12/1/2003 12:38:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, bahadiracuner@xxxxxxxxx writes: > Subj: Re: AIRLINE Digest - 28 Nov 2003 to 29 Nov 2003 (#2003-196) > Date: 12/1/2003 12:38:43 PM Eastern Standard Time > From: <A HREF="mailto:bahadiracuner@xxxxxxxxx";>bahadiracuner@xxxxxxxxx</A> > Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> > To: <A HREF="mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> > Sent from the Internet > > The A380 was planned with Asian airlines in mind more than US Airlines. > Let us not forget that all the projections are showing that Asian traffic > will grow much faster than US and European pax loads for years to come. > Major reason for it is the fact that more people will be able to afford > plane travel. If you think about just India and China and how their > economies > are growing, add that to other Southeastern Asian countries, then you will > see that there will be a need for A380. > > I am sure if Boeing was the party that came up with the A380, people would > get on the case of LAX if they wanted Boeing to pay for the airport > improvements. > > I think the departure gate areas are a major problem also. When I deplane > or board widebodies in ORD (gates B16-C18) the place is a zoo because the > gate area doesn't have enough capacity. > > Airports have these to worry about besides the taxiways and runways.. > > On the other hand, people with shops in the terminals are going to > look forward for the shoppers getting on/off that A380.. > > BAHA > Fan of United's Ch.9 > > -----Original Message----- > From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of > B787300@xxxxxxx > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 11:52 AM > To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: AIRLINE Digest - 28 Nov 2003 to 29 Nov 2003 (#2003-196) > > > You are correct, Al. Airbus should pick up the other 50%. > > Jose Prize > Fan of somebody other than airports paying for the problems created by this > beast > > In a message dated 11/30/2003 11:11:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, > exatc@xxxxxxxxxx writes: > > >Subj: Re: AIRLINE Digest - 28 Nov 2003 to 29 Nov 2003 (#2003-196) > > Date: 11/30/2003 11:11:24 PM Eastern Standard Time > > From: <A HREF="mailto:exatc@xxxxxxxxxx";>exatc@xxxxxxxxxx</A> > > Reply-to: <A > HREF="mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > To: <A > HREF="mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Sent from the Internet > > > > > > > >Jose 50% is not enough. > >Al >