[BBKing]

One of the points about the A380 is it needs the same or less runway than a 747, so anywhere a 747 can land/take off a 380 can too (this includes Stansted, where the runway is only about 10,000 feet actually, a fair bit less than Heathrow). Whether it can park at the terminal is a different issue - I'm a bit concerned about what happens when one of them has to divert to an airport it can't park at - do they put it in a corner and empty the toilets every hour till the original airport is open again? Pleasant.

As far as I can see from the order book, the 380 is aimed squarely at the Gulf airlines and south east Asian countries - it's best suited to long-haul flights rather than hops to New York and other eastern US destinations (which barely counts as long-haul when it's only using about half your maximum range). 787s and 777s should have the Atlantic run sewn up - there are lots of suitable places to serve direct either side of the pond, so Boeing's strategy appears sound there. Long haul to Hong Kong, however, it breaks down and Airbus cleans up. I think there's room for both and given that China is going to be so damn important Airbus may be pointing the way forwards.