A380 suites


Status
Not open for further replies.
maybe it should also come equipped with an oxygen tank and parachute. Now that will as least provide some level of security.
 

Airbus got serious production problems. The parts made by different groups in different countries. Disputes, delays, rush job to meet deadline. So is it properly made? You feel safe? You know what happened to Titanic in maiden voyage.

Do I care that the plane is bigger?
Bigger so what?

It is useful only to airline, cause can fly more passengers, earn more.

To me as a traveler, I only want to be safe and alive at the end of the flight.

Actually service levels will be low. Cause cabin crew stressed out to serve so many people in one plane.

Remember the show Titanic when poorer travellers were shunted to below decks... Same here, the fuss is all about the high paying "Suite Class" passengers only.

I do not think the airbus is an improvement at all, from the passenger point of view.

Think carefully about it.
Let me exaggerate, so you can understand the problem.
Imagine they made a plane that can carry 10,000 passengers at one go at one time.
Are you sure you want to fly in such a plane?

Is it "Better" ?
 

Airbus got serious production problems. The parts made by different groups in different countries. Disputes, delays, rush job to meet deadline. So is it properly made? You feel safe? You know what happened to Titanic in maiden voyage.

Do I care that the plane is bigger?
Bigger so what?

It is useful only to airline, cause can fly more passengers, earn more.

To me as a traveler, I only want to be safe and alive at the end of the flight.

Actually service levels will be low. Cause cabin crew stressed out to serve so many people in one plane.

Remember the show Titanic when poorer travellers were shunted to below decks... Same here, the fuss is all about the high paying "Suite Class" passengers only.

I do not think the airbus is an improvement at all, from the passenger point of view.

Think carefully about it.
Let me exaggerate, so you can understand the problem.
Imagine they made a plane that can carry 10,000 passengers at one go at one time.
Are you sure you want to fly in such a plane?

Is it "Better" ?

Lets look at it this way:

You wanna sail the 7 seas in a sampan or mega cruise liner? :D

Got plus and minus la. Bigger will have more staff. SQ will not wanna have its reputation on the line with lousy service. It took them millions and years to built that reputation.
 

-Bigger plane means better chance of getting a seat on the flight, very very important from passenger point of view. The plane is also less noisy the those in the market.

-I dont care about service, I always bring my own food and drinks on board.

-Titanic did not sink because of design or system fault, it is a strings of Human error that causes the sinking.

-That must be a Mother Ship, being able to take 10000 pax. I will sure take it, Mother Ship leh .....:bsmilie:
 

a good link for the view.

Just saw part 2 of the airbus story.
Yesterday saw part 1.
Tomorrow got part 3.

Omygosh! It is intensely and ridiculously political.

State of the art technical precision manufacturing and politics should not mix.

Who in his right mind will make a part here, a part there to satisfy the politicians that their country has a part to play and a benefit from the project.

It is incredibly stupid, from a certain point of view.

And dangerous.

Not to mention outrageously un-economical to produce this way.

Sending part of the huge and heavy fuselage through little French village roads....

The current rah-rah PR machine will cast a beautiful smoke screen over this inherent silliness that can lead to terrible air flight disasters over time.

What if one of the countries did not quite make their part properly...and it is not immediately apparent or easily checkable, a latent defect...will they tell you? or the other airbus partners? With so many millions $$$ and more importantly, the country's engineering reputation on the line? No, they will not tell.

This is disaster in the making , some way later in time ......
 

but the way i see it, the window doesnt look opaque.so it's still no privacy.not to mention the top part is opened, so got to keep volume down....no?:bsmilie:

Are you a heavy breather? Or just like a train when it comes.....
 

The "Mile High" Club? :bsmilie: I would rather use the toilets, more excitement.

More excitement or more excrement? :embrass:
 

Shagging on a plane is seriously over rated. It isn't so great once you get down to the practical aspects. The main problem is with the seat belt and positions. Just not conducive.
Best place is still the toilet :thumbsup: But very crammed and difficult to chut pattern.. and definitely not sound proof!!

I'd rather watch the in flight entertainment :bsmilie:

You rather watch the inflght entertainment? I thought you would be THE inflight entertainment with your partner! ;)
 

i wonder if someone wet the bed ... wat will happen ? :think:
 

No hanky panky in A380 suites please: SIA

www.straitstimes.com said:
SINGAPORE - SINGAPORE Airlines, the first operator of the new Airbus A380, has dashed the hopes of sexual thrill-seekers planning to engage in amorous activity aboard the world's biggest jumbo jet.

The carrier said it would ask passengers on the A380 to refrain from sex while ensconced in one of its 12 first-class suites, which boast the world's first airborne double beds.
'All we ask of customers, wherever they are on our aircraft, is to observe standards that don't cause offence to other customers and crew,' the company told Reuters in a statement.
'Nothing different applies for our Singapore Airlines Suites customers.' While private, the double cabins are neither sound proofed nor completely sealed.
Singapore Airlines, the world's second-largest airline by market value, started commercial flights of the double-decker A380 last week with a Singapore-Sydney service.
'So they'll sell you a double bed, and give you privacy and endless champagne and then say you can't do what comes naturally?' Mr Tony Elwood, who travelled with wife Julie in a suite aboard the inaugural flight, told the Times of London. 'They seem to have done everything they can to make it romantic, short of bringing round oysters,' Ms Julie said. 'I'd say they shouldn't really complain, should they?' -- REUTERS
:sweat:
 

But of course...we are Singapore you know. Can not "Play Play" heheheheh

no lah.. it's for safety reason.

Else the pilots can't tell when they hit real turbulence. :sweat:
 

no lah.. it's for safety reason.

Else the pilots can't tell when they hit real turbulence. :sweat:



You cant really feel turbulence in the A380.. its THAT smooth and stable...
 

do u know ? there are couples went into washrooms for a quick sex during flight.

;)
 

http://www.a380.singaporeair.com/content/interior/index.html

have you guys seen it?
how much per pax i wonder...:bsmilie:

Yeap I sat in it and tried it before - it can fit two people sitting or one person sleeping.

may be curtain and sound absorbent will be added later on after some customers complaint :bsmilie:

It won't be sound absorbent because the walls are not full height walls. There are curtains though.
 

well, believe me, some people will just go ahead and have sex in the suites.:bsmilie:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top