Should manufacturers launch larger aircraft?

[YorkRailFan]

Following a discussion in the Heathrow third runway and new London airport threads, I thought it would be appropriate to start this thread. The A380 and 747 both don't have a true replacement, and there is some demand for a replacement for these aircraft, most notably Emirates has been begging Airbus for the A380neo. Another, often forgotten topic is, a 747F replacement, the 747F had one key feature that separated it from most freighters, it's opening cargo nose, this is one feature that both the upcoming 777-8F and A350F won't have. The cargo nose allows the loading and unloading of some items that couldn't be loaded onto the 777-8F and A350, but there is no replacement for the 747F in site, not even on the drawing board.

 

[birchesgreen]

Manufacturers will build them if there is a market but there isn't. The 777X is as big as you'll get now and thats massive in any case.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The B777-9X and the A350-1000 can get up to 400 passengers. I don’t think there’s the demand for bigger, airlines would rather fly smaller planes more frequently.

If anyone other than Emirates wanted the A380 they’d still be making them. Alas they don’t.

 

[najaB]

The B777-9X and the A350-1000 can get up to 400 passengers. I don’t think there’s the demand for bigger, airlines would rather fly smaller planes more frequently.

There almost certainly is a market for larger aircraft since the A350-1000 with 400 seats is... let's say "snug". Several airlines that retired their A380s and 747s are regretting it. Lufthansa being an example, they retired their A380s but have reactivated some of them since they provide first class where smaller twins don't. And "smaller planes more frequently" doesn't work well if you're operating from slot constrained hubs.

If anyone other than Emirates wanted the A380 they’d still be making them. Alas they don’t.

There are several airlines who would probably consider an A380neo if it existed. Emirates being top of the list, but BA have said that they would have taken more A380s if the price had been a bit lower as they are quite happy with the aircraft and plan to keep them through at least 2030. The problem was that Emirates wouldn't commit to a large enough order to keep the line open as I think they were trying to squeeze Airbus on price and Airbus didn't play ball.

 

[Sorcerer]

Large aircraft like the 747 and A380 have had their day, and even high-capacity ones like the A350-1000 and 777X will only be useful on high demand routes with limited airport slots such as London to New York. Ever since twin-engine jets of smaller sizes became more efficient and the market began leaning towards a more point-to-point model over the hub-and-spoke model that the A380 was built for there really wasn't a need for such high-capacity aircraft, and the airline industry being notoriously difficult to profit from would definitely prefer to sell less seats so they aren't operating at a loss. Emirates was the exception to this because Dubai is perfectly centred for the hub-and-spoke model, and of course having the financial backing of an incredibly wealthy monarchy helps as well.

 

[Dr_Paul]

I imagine that's it's unlikely to happen, but could Airbus put the A380 back into production were airlines to show sufficient interest in ordering new ones, or have the jigs been dismantled or scrapped? And if there is a renewed demand for very big planes, might not a revived A380 be the full-length variant for which the airframe was originally intended? On the other hand, might not the A380 be a sufficiently old design that a heavily revised model or even a new design be necessary?

 

[birchesgreen]

I think the A380 production line has been dismantled and the space used for another type now.

 

[najaB]

I think the A380 production line has been dismantled and the space used for another type now.

Yes. They're producing A32x there now.

 

[birchesgreen]

Yes. They're producing A32x there now.

Thats it, couldn't remember if it was A32x or A350.

 

[MasterSpenny]

My answer to the thread title: No because it may be too much weight. I think creating some larger aircraft types could not even take off successfully! (I believe that last section of my sentence regarding not being able to take off is a physics law, where the weight makes take off harder, but I am not 100% sure)

 

[najaB]

My answer to the thread title: No because it may be too much weight. I think creating some larger aircraft types could not even take off successfully!

Sorry, but that's not correct.

In simple terms there are four forces involved in flight: lift, weight, thrust and drag. An aircraft will fly as long as lift is greater than its weight - and it doesn't matter how large weight is, as long as you can generate more lift than weight then it will fly. Generating more lift is [overly simplified] a matter of either making a bigger/better wing, or increasing speed to generate the more lift with the same wing.

 

[Snow1964]

The A380 could have had a stretch, and was designed for slightly longer version (never built), in some ways the A380 was slightly overweight as it allowed for the longer version. The only reason it wasn't built is most airports weren't laid out for planes on taxiways to pass anything longer than 80m at gates

As for the 777-X they took orders for that from 2013 for service in 2020, but now none are expected in service into at least 2025.

Even British Airways originally planned to be operating them last year (2022), as it phased out its 747 jumbos, but they went when covid hit, and now they are short of big planes since 777-X are delayed years

 

[edwin_m]

Sorry, but that's not correct.

In simple terms there are four forces involved in flight: lift, weight, thrust and drag. An aircraft will fly as long as lift is greater than its weight - and it doesn't matter how large weight is, as long as you can generate more lift than weight then it will fly. Generating more lift is [overly simplified] a matter of either making a bigger/better wing, or increasing speed to generate the more lift with the same wing.

Looking at the basic physics, if all dimensions of a plane were doubled, the lift would increase by about a factor of 4 because it depends mostly on the surface area of the wings. But the weight would increase by a factor of 8, assuming the same average density in the larger fuselage. Hence one would expect a larger plane to have wings increased by more than its other dimensions, and I guess there comes a point where this ceases to be viable as size increases.

 

[najaB]

Looking at the basic physics, if all dimensions of a plane were doubled, the lift would increase by about a factor of 4 because it depends mostly on the surface area of the wings. But the weight would increase by a factor of 8, assuming the same average density in the larger fuselage. Hence one would expect a larger plane to have wings increased by more than its other dimensions, and I guess there comes a point where this ceases to be viable as size increases.

That's where things start getting really complex as it's not just about area, but more about the overall wing shape. There's a reason that wing design can make or break a multi-billion dollar aircraft program (yes, MD-11 I'm looking at you!)

But yes, there is a point where current materials science would meet a limit, but we're nowhere near that point. Boeing designed an aircraft in the 1960s that would have had a payload weight on the order of 1,000 tonnes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_RC-1.

 

[JamesT]

That's where things start getting really complex as it's not just about area, but more about the overall wing shape. There's a reason that wing design can make or break a multi-billion dollar aircraft program (yes, MD-11 I'm looking at you!)

But yes, there is a point where current materials science would meet a limit, but we're nowhere near that point. Boeing designed an aircraft in the 1960s that would have had a payload weight on the order of 1,000 tonnes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_RC-1.

If you want to look just at aircraft that actually flew, the A380 has a max takeoff weight of 575t, the Antonov An-225 before the Russians destroyed it was 640t.

 

[najaB]

If you want to look just at aircraft that actually flew, the A380 has a max takeoff weight of 575t, the Antonov An-225 before the Russians destroyed it was 640t.

Note that the 1,000t was payload rather than max takeoff weight. That would have been closer to 1,600t or about 3 A380s.