A380 Air Travel - As good as the hype suggests ?

[Rodge]

Thanks mate.
Just thought you guys might like another look at that crazy Atlantis hotel in Dubai, looks like another world, hence the name I suppose Geez, you could really recharge your batteries there for a while and then its only a relativly short 7 hour flight to London.
http://travel.msn.co.nz/middleeast/d...-maddest-hotel

Getting really keen on the Dubai stop-over idea.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by Rodge

^^ Thanks mate. yeah I think we could just "cope" with slumming it here for a few days http://www.hotelscombined.co.nz/Hote...s_The_Palm.htm
Doesn't seem outrageously priced, would love to stay at the Burdg or however you spell that but rooms start at 1,700 $U.S. a night

A decent hotel room starts around $80 a night. I think that's what we paid in 2011.

I treated the family to Easter lunch at the Burg, at the restaurant which forms the cross bar near the top of the sail, was $150 a head for 3 course set menu and worth every cent for the experience alone.

Still remember, the bill for lunch was more than our hotel bill!

The foyer of the Burg is amazing.... as is the fleet of cars out the front.... I will stay a night one day ;)

[Rodge]

^^ That's a great idea, lunch at the Burg, I think I'll follow suit on that one

Have a look at this, enjoy
http://www.pbase.com/markham/dubai

Imagine flying first class on Emirates 380, transfers by Helicopter to the Burg and staying in the presidental suite.

I'm off to buy my lotto tickets.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by Rodge

^^ That's a great idea, lunch at the Burg, I think I'll follow suit on that one

Have a look at this, enjoy
http://www.pbase.com/markham/dubai

Book from home. To reserve a spot its a little more complicated than just calling or emailing with your name and number.

They have several restaurants, try to get a set menu deal, you can imagine ordering alacarte can get costly.

[rancidpunx]

Dubai is a great place to stop over. I will book into the Burj for a night one day just to experience it.

[EASYBOSS]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Thanks guys for your great advice. I'm a big fella, built like an All Black front row forward so I think a common sense approach is to look for a really good special on a premium economy basis. I've never travelled further than Perth from Auckland so when it happens this will be the trip of a lifetime so we want it to be special. We need to get another duck in a row before doing anything and there's no rush.

Interesting seat configuration on Air N.Z.'s premium economy, I guess a little T.V folds out of the arm of the seat on each side ? Not sure about the recline angle with offset seating like this, wouldn't the seats recline into each other limiting the seat back angle and impeeding sleep to some extent ? Look reasonably wide though although these celebreties are both small sized people....
http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/intern...onomy-worth-it
They use the 777-300 ER planes...not so sure about those twin engined planes but I guess if you're number's up, its up. At times the premium economy to London can be as low as ~ $3,000 Kiwi. As has been suggested if normal economy on an all A380 service is $3,000 and there's apparently no premium economy option on them WTF ???? might as well try and get premium economy seats on a 777 for about the same money.

P.S. I know a licenced aircraft maintenance engineer who works on the jet engines at Air N.Z's base and was talking to him the other day. We got taking about planes, funny that,... anyway he told me that at takeoff thrust a fully laden 747-400 burns 191 litres of jet fuel per minute, per engine !!!! Just as well that's split 400 ways ...and I thought my SC V8 was hard on fuel...

Mate you have come to the right conclusion, as I have flown all classes on ANZ to the USA, and I will never fly QANTAS again, apart from my upcoming fligt to Sydney

Hope this makes so sence, it goes like this

So I get a call, this is the short version.

You have a double booking on a flight from Sydney to Auckland. (apparently you can’t do that)

Yep

Well you can’t do that so we will credit you back your Business class booking

No don’t do that, I want to fly back Business, lets loose the cattle class one.

That will mean a re issue of the ticket and using 4000 points.

What, I give you a seat back and have to pay for it using points, that’s not the aussie way, and its ANZAC day WTF.

Sorry that’s the way it is.

OK, I was going to lose the points anyway.

Go Air New Zealand

Shoot me a PM, and come and visit with you dogs and I can tell you all about my flight class experiencies on ANZ

[casabonka]

We did Syd - la on an a380, the return on a 747, couldn't notice too much of a difference apart from how much newer it was. That was in cattle class of course!

[Pedro]

Airbus are **** boxes. Ask any senior Captain.
Those passengers on that A-380 flight out of Singapore when the engine disintegrated are only alive today due to the competence of the crew.
The last two of those heaps of rubbish I flew in, both had major failures in mid-air. The worst was half way between Honolulu and San Fran in an A-380 and the starboard engine **** itself. Picture it ... 2,500 miles from land over open ocean and wondering if the remaining port engine is going to fail as well.
The engine failed due to rupturing of an oil line and the problem is still there as supported by many “incidence reports”. Only last year (five years after my experience) one of these flying disasters had exactly the same thing happen after taking off from Melbourne and so it goes on as Airbus Industries seemingly have done nothing about correcting these oil line failures. I fly to the USA every year and go out of my way to make sure I’m not flying on one of those pieces of rubbish.

Check these links...

http://www.humanevents.com/2009/06/1...is-the-airbus/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...rs-flight.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_72

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...84O00J20120525

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-...aught-on-fire/

[Feathers]

I travelled on one from Singapore to Sydney a few years ago, and apart from looking at it out the terminal window and thinking "Holy hell, how does that get/stay airborne?" it was not really any different from any other plane for those of us in economy.

Slept most of the way home anyway.

[Outbackjack]

Did Sydney to LA and back last year. A380 both ways. A380 is very quiet and smooth. Qantas must have got their seats from Kmart. Seats are terrible. Service is scarce indeed with Qantas. Going back to the US on October. Not flying Qantas this time.

[ryeman]

Flew Melbourne to London return in 09 using Etihad A340.
Prior to each push back a prayer....a bit disconcerting.
First class are the crumple zone...v real chance of survival in cattle class at the back.

[AdamL]

Flying to LA Friday week on a Qantas A380... Exit row leg room FTW!

[Feathers]

Originally Posted by ryeman

Prior to each push back a prayer....a bit disconcerting.

I drove buses for a local school that did the same thing before we departed on every trip. My driving isn't that bad...

[GTP534]

Hi Rodge,

I've flown on the A380 many times between Singapore and Sydney over the last few years, particularly between 2008 and 2010. Always Singapore Airlines, economy class.

It's a lot quieter and smoother than the 747-400.

The entertainment screens were pretty good and I like to watch a few movies during each trip.

I always travel as close to the rear as I can and always an aisle seat in the middle row. Usually it's closer to the toilets so you can avoid the rush after a meal service and there's more chance of having a vacant seat next to you on some flights.

[ryeman]

Returning fm London Etihad out of Abu Dhabi the cabin crew were determined to have a quiet trip, wanting the blind drawn for the whole trip.
Luckily I had a window seat and as we were arriving in ML at 1805 I opened the blind abeam Singapore and basked my eyes in the sun the rest of the way.
The cabin crew wanted me to close the blind but when I suggested that arriving in ML it would be stupid to sleep all the way, they sheepishly withdrew.
The result was no jet lag what so ever, but I pity those who cooperated with the crew and would have taken days to recover without melatonin.
The secret is having the port side seat home going 'against' the sun.

[Rodge]

Some great feed-back, thanks everyone. Feel free to continue sharing your travel experiences good and bad, I find it very interesting reading.

Shoot me a PM, and come and visit with your dogs and I can tell you all about my flight class experiencies on ANZ

Be great to catch up again soon mate. I'll be in touch soon and look forward to it. I'll have to give all three dogs a bath first, they're disgustingly dirty at the moment.

[Fev]

From NZ you'd be better off flying Air NZ to North America and then over to Europe. Don't go via the middle east unless you really have to. Both have their plusses but from NZ it should be cheaper to fly on Air NZ unless it's a funny date.

Go in and speak to a travel agent. They all have price beat guarentees and can find flights you definitely won't be able to. I should know, I used to be one.

[ryeman]

Reduce jet lag by 'round the world' E to W.

[Kieron]

Haven't been on the 380 but a few general flying tips -

Malaysia Airlines on their 777 and 747's have 34" pitch seats and 17" width. This is the largest legroom in economy of any carrier. Their A380 is 32" pitch x18" wide.

Emirates A380 is 32" x 18" or 34" x 18".

QANTAS 380 is a knee crunching 31x18.1 (the LCC AirAsia X is 32" x 16.5 by comparison)

So what about exit row seats?
Invariably they are narrower than the normal seats as the meal tray is stored in the armrest and the armrest can't be lifted up between seats. They are typically colder, are near noisy galleys or toilets where people tend to congregate and the window seat legroom is often compromised by the doors emergency slide (747's, 777, A330/340)

What part of the plane to sit then?
Back of plane typically gives a bumpy ride and is noisier due to being behind the engines, so I go for as far forwards as I can, window seats are noisier, aisles seats quieter but you get bumped by passing people.

If your tall, seat pitch is more relevant and if your a big build, seat width becomes important, I'm the former so choose Malaysian if flying long haul.

[zilo]

Flew a qantas a380 to LA and back.

No extra space or comfort.

Big issue with waiting to get off the plane...still only one door and it seems to take forever.

Then 400+ people all hitting customs at once is no pleasant experience either.

Give me a 747 any day....ecomomy is ecomomy.

[Rodge]

Thanks guys, nobody has mentioned the pressure difference yet ?. A380's are pressurised to the equilivent altitude of 5,000 ft above sea level and that's supposed to be kinder on your body. I understand normal air pressure in an airliner is the equilivent of 8,000 ft altitude so your heart apparently works harder as its actually a little harder to breathe.

I guess on a long haul flight on an A380 maybe you'd feel less "second hand" at the other end. Even flying to Perth I felt quite tired and listless for a couple of days afterwards, time zone difference to Auckland is 5 hours so the day never seemed to end...mind you the fact that it was 17 degrees in Auckland when I left and 42 degrees in Perth for the following 3 days definitly didn't help.

How are people feeling after they get off a long haul flight on an A380 compared to other aircraft, better shape ?

Obviously I'm not pregnant but have a look at this
http://www.pregnancy-info.net/effect...pregnancy.html
and note their comment about not flying in unpressurised aircraft at 10,000 ft. If there's so much implied difference between 10,000 ft unpressurised and normal 8,000 ft air pressure (as stated in this article) in a regular airliner then by logical extension there must be tangible benifets to people with high blood pressure, (like me), or relativly poor circulation by flying in an A380, i.e 5,000 ft air prssure vs 8,000 ft ?

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Kieron

Haven't been on the 380 but a few general flying tips -

Malaysia Airlines on their 777 and 747's have 34" pitch seats and 17" width. This is the largest legroom in economy of any carrier. Their A380 is 32" pitch x18" wide.

Emirates A380 is 32" x 18" or 34" x 18".

QANTAS 380 is a knee crunching 31x18.1 (the LCC AirAsia X is 32" x 16.5 by comparison)

So what about exit row seats?
Invariably they are narrower than the normal seats as the meal tray is stored in the armrest and the armrest can't be lifted up between seats. They are typically colder, are near noisy galleys or toilets where people tend to congregate and the window seat legroom is often compromised by the doors emergency slide (747's, 777, A330/340)

What part of the plane to sit then?
Back of plane typically gives a bumpy ride and is noisier due to being behind the engines, so I go for as far forwards as I can, window seats are noisier, aisles seats quieter but you get bumped by passing people.

If your tall, seat pitch is more relevant and if your a big build, seat width becomes important, I'm the former so choose Malaysian if flying long haul.

Sounds like travelling on a plane just plain sucks regardless if where you are inside it.

[Rodge]

Hmmm, some interesting stuff for those over 50, or anyone who currently suffers from high blood pressure , or who is obese, or suffers from poor circulation...A380's significantly better cabin pressure at 5,000 ft appears to be the way to go for "at risk" travellers. Note the test detailed in the second link was only for a 5 hour simulated flight at 7,000 ft cabin pressure....hmmmm, one can only ponder how the effects are extrapolated for a 14 hour flight at 8,000 ft equilivent air pressure, no wonder at risk travellers can feel significantly negative health and wellbeing effects after long haul travel.

http://travellotus.com/?p=266

http://acer-coe.org/files/pressurereport2011.pdf
Executive Summary
Congress mandated FAA to study the health effects of cabin pressures in accordance
with the National Research Council (NRC) recommendation to evaluate safe limits
(NRC 2002). The NRC reported that the currently allowed cabin altitude of 2,440
meters (8,000 feet), set decades ago, may not be adequate for cabin crew and
passengers of varying age and health status.

[ryeman]

My sons say its quieter.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Thanks guys, nobody has mentioned the pressure difference yet ?. A380's are pressurised to the equilivent altitude of 5,000 ft above sea level and that's supposed to be kinder on your body. I understand normal air pressure in an airliner is the equilivent of 8,000 ft altitude so your heart apparently works harder as its actually a little harder to breathe.

I guess on a long haul flight on an A380 maybe you'd feel less "second hand" at the other end. Even flying to Perth I felt quite tired and listless for a couple of days afterwards, time zone difference to Auckland is 5 hours so the day never seemed to end...mind you the fact that it was 17 degrees in Auckland when I left and 42 degrees in Perth for the following 3 days definitly didn't help.

How are people feeling after they get off a long haul flight on an A380 compared to other aircraft, better shape ?

Obviously I'm not pregnant but have a look at this
http://www.pregnancy-info.net/effect...pregnancy.html
and note their comment about not flying in unpressurised aircraft at 10,000 ft. If there's so much implied difference between 10,000 ft unpressurised and normal 8,000 ft air pressure (as stated in this article) in a regular airliner then by logical extension there must be tangible benefits to people with high blood pressure, (like me), or relatively poor circulation by flying in an A380, i.e 5,000 ft air pressure vs 8,000 ft ?

That's the first I've heard of it on the A380.
Essentially, you can make cabin altitude on most aircraft almost sea level throughout the flight but there is massive costs and efficiencies that you're playing with on the environmental panel.
A greater pressure differential from outside the aircraft to inside the aircraft speeds up fatigue, as air-planes are essentially a balloon. I can guarantee there are several advisories against setting the cabin altitude so low in the qref.
Further, that's a massive cabin, and you'd be pulling so much bleed air from the engines your fuel burn would go up substantially.
Airbus may have advertised the A380 as being capable of doing this, but they notoriously advertise and promise one thing, then deliver another.
Fact is, this plane is still grossly over weight to be profitable and considering the problems in development and test flight where the empenage suffered major de-lamination in the glare, for my little aviation brain it says each airframe has special caveats and conditions placed on it to try and gain some longevity. So far two that I know of have shown buckling in the fuselage by the wing faring up to the L2 door frame, I don't think anyone in their right mind would deliberately over pressurise one of these things given the existing structural issues.
From what I know, the 787 is currently the only operating airliner where the cabin is pressurised to 6000 feet.

Take a watch with an altimeter on the flight and you'll get your answer.

[Rodge]

Thanks mate appreciate your insights.

http://www.globalaircraft.org/planes...80.pl#features

Extract from above
The A380 produces 50% less cabin noise than a 747 and has higher cabin air pressure
(equivalent to an altitude of 1500 metres (5000 ft) versus 2500 metres (8000 ft)); both
features are expected to reduce the effects of travel fatigue.

I guess when it comes to these new airliners whether its the 787 Nightmare-liner or A380 there's always going to be teething problems and embellishment of the truth is nothing new when it comes to marketing of anything, especially aircraft this expensive !

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Thanks mate appreciate your insights.

http://www.globalaircraft.org/planes...80.pl#features

Extract from above
The A380 produces 50% less cabin noise than a 747 and has higher cabin air pressure
(equivalent to an altitude of 1500 metres (5000 ft) versus 2500 metres (8000 ft)); both
features are expected to reduce the effects of travel fatigue.

I guess when it comes to these new airliners whether its the 787 Nightmare-liner or A380 there's always going to be teething problems and embellishment of the truth is nothing new when it comes to marketing of anything, especially aircraft this expensive !

1) Dugongs spend twice and much time in maintenance than jumbos so therefore half the time in the air and so half the noise.

2) When they state there is more pressure in a dugong they are talking about emotional stress not pascals.

3) Dugongs come in two versions, playstation and xbox. They also have a built in app called "Where is my dugong" to assist the jumbo pilots to drop off the LAMEs and pick up the pax.

If it is not Boeing we're not going.........

p.s. what would you know about dugongs LTD you traitor.

[Rodge]

I don't know what you're on about Flappist WTF ???

Here's another interesting report on ther air pressure matter.

http://blog.benoa.net/2011/01/a380-cabin.html

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Rodge

I don't know what you're on about Flappist WTF ???

Here's another interesting report on ther air pressure matter.

http://blog.benoa.net/2011/01/a380-cabin.html

That does not surprise me at all, others do though.....

[Rodge]

On aircraft they recommend you take it easy on the drink, which seems like a pertinent recommendation at the minute...