wrote:
I sat through a Boeing presentation on the 787 compared to the
A380, and the 787's max fuel burn per seat-mile was lower that the
lowest that the Airbus folks were predicting. This is, of course, a
Boeing perspective, but even if there's some exaggeration it still
looks pretty good.

Dan

Well here's another metric to think about: fuel burn per empty seat.
Boeing's contention has for a long time been that there's more to be
gained by having more direct routes served by smaller planes.

In this view, the Sonic Cruiser was a strategic feint which forced
Airbus to put all its resources behind the A380, while Boeing's plan
all along was for something more like the 787. The A380 will turn a
profit but the 787 may be a much bigger financial success, and now
Airbus has to play catch-up me-too with the A350.

Needless to say, if he were alive today I suspect Howard Hughes would
find both companies equally gutless and addicted to the governmental
teat. It may be that the cost of developing a new transport is such
that there is simply no other way to do it anymore, but I see no heroic
entrepreneurialism in either one.

-cwk.