It seems to me that the main selling point of the Airbus A380 super jumbo double decker aircraft is that it not only holds a hell of a lot of people, but also that it is supposed to be a very efficient aircraft: better fuel consumption, better range, and supposedly better turn-around times, etc.
Has anyone figured out how these efficiencies would work out for your average traveler? As in, would the cost of flying a passenger from Point A to Point B be such-and-such percent less in an A380 compared to a 747?
What I’m driving at here is whether an average passenger will see lower ticket prices to offset the predicted hassle of dealing with perhaps hundreds of additional passengers compared to existing aircraft.
I doubt it since the airlines has to pay for the airplane, and those things are not cheap.
Don’t hold your breath for any $99 round trip to Hawaii fares.
Let’s not forget that airports will need to make serious infrastructure changes to accommodate an A380. At some point in the funding mix, A380 passengers will have to pay for them rather than pawn off the costs on the community owning the airport.
In an industry where round trip tickets cost less than one way tickets, travel to the neighboring state costs more than coast-to-coast, and ticket prices for the same trip fluctuate wildly from day to day, I doubt that we’ll see any significant difference in ticket prices between flying on a 747 and an A380.
Airlines already know you’re willing to pay the current prices. The efficiencies are more likely to allow them to make bigger profits (or any profit in some cases.)
Also, according to the Wikipedia article on the A380, Singapore Airlines will be using a 485 seat configuration and Qantas will be using a 501 seat configuration. It’s possible that you won’t be boarding with the full 853 passengers on other airlines either as that is for a full economy configuration.