All the “gets longer” reasons you state here are solved by the “add more staff” and “use more exits” options.

I also live in Australia and have flown both the Dreamliner and A380 and if possible will always choose the A380.

Far roomier plane, much quieter and even though it may be just a coincidence every time it seems to suffer far less turbulence.

> it seems to suffer far less turbulence

That's not a coincidence. It makes perfect sense that a large heavy aircraft like the 380 will be harder for wind and air pockets to push it around, just like big ships are far more stable than smaller ones. There's a world of difference between coming into (say) Singapore with its turbulent tropical air on a little a320 and a giant like a 380.

I've been on narrowbody flights where we bounced around like we were inside a washing machine; in a 380 i've barely ever had to even pick up my drink!

The relevant metric (at least in theory) is wing loading, that is supported weight per wing area. Having said that, I find the A380 super smooth (I also take care that I sit near the wing/center of gravity).

> All the “gets longer” reasons you state here are solved by the “add more staff” and “use more exits” options.

No. Longer immigration queues could be solved by the government adding more staff, but they cannot be solved by the airline adding more staff, and the airline is the one buying or otherwise choosing to use the plane.

Automation is the other solution. For example in Helsinki-Vantaa, there are far more automated passport check gates than there are traditional immigration desks: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bergie/3176184017

Even at SFO I've gotten to fill the immigration questionnaire a few times with a self-service machine, greatly reducing the time spent on the process.

They should definitely pressure the airport (to pressure the government) to create a few of those precious New Jobs and add some more people to immigration. It's just ridiculous in many airports, particularly in Europe. And it's been done, it's not like it's some pipe dream.

"Let's do the same amount of work with more people" opens the government up to a certain amount of criticism.

Do I really have to explain to them how to do their job?

You're the one suggesting New Jobs. By hypothesis, larger planes mean that arrivals are more concentrated, leading to longer lines, but not that there are more arrivals.

I have flown the A380 in economy multiple times. It is a premium experience. The plane is so big that you don't feel turbulences as much. And it's relatively new, so it's very silent. On the upper deck, because of cabin curvature, window seats have a large armrest opening and doubling as a generous chest where you can put all your stuff and keep your legs free of clutter.

Certainly when I flew economy with Emirates, it compared with Premium Economy on Virgin, and was much better than any other economy airlines I've flown.

The plane feels more spacious (taller ceiling in the walkway), the seats are bigger and spaced further, at least on Emirates. Added doors on some airports makes the embarkation and disembarkation feel about the same as on any other plane. I prefer aisle so I haven't noticed anything wrong with the curve of the walls.

Not OP but I will go out of my way to select Airbus jets; their NVH is noticeably lower than Boeings jets, which results in a far more comfortable travel, especially long-haul (A380 being up there in terms of comfort).

NVH?

It’s a regular occurrence on HN someone dropping an acronym that is so obscure or specific to the topic at hand, and without explanation, that no amount of googleitsu will find the correct decoding. In this case it was pretty easy,nvh = noise, vibration, harshness.

I had to google it too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise,_vibration,_and_harshnes...

Noise/Vibrations/Harshness

Personally I find Boeing seats to be more comfortable than Airbus seats. Maybe it's just my butt but it is noticeable.

Neither one is a seat manufacturer.

Airline seats are independently purchased, and while both Boeing and Airbus have contracts for factory installed seating (and for their demo aircraft), most larger airlines seem to independently source and install their own seats. One seat model could appear on both an Airbus and Boeing aircraft.

See: http://www.airlineupdate.com/content_subscription/interiors/...

Except for the 787. If memory is correct, Boeing dictates what brand / models of seat is used in the 787 (something rather unusual). I can try and find a source if needed, but I’m pretty sure I heard that from a reliable source.

So does that mean the placement of the overhead light/call button is the same in all of them?

I had an economy comfort seat on a KLM 787 recently and the buttons were affixed to the inside of the seat arm at leg level, and not recessed. I kept turning on the overhead light with my leg all through the night. Infuriatingly poor design. A few mm's more recess would likely have made it much harder to accidentally press.

Overall quite a negative first 787 experience...

Norwegian 787s have the light and call buttons as part of the touch screen display in front of you. So different per customer

Ah, I wonder if only the bulkhead seats are different. In those the display isn't always in front of you so the light control has to be available elsewhere.

Next time I'll avoid a bulkhead seat in any case.

Their contract with LIFT by EnCore on a single aircraft type doesn't negate the point I made. Which was that neither aircraft manufacturer is a seat manufacturer, and that most seats aren't aircraft manufacturer exclusives.

Seat manufacturers produce seats for both Boeing and Airbus aircraft and aside from brackets, they're identical. So claiming that one manufacturer is more comfortable than the other is a little odd, given the market realities in the industry.

I didn’t disagree with your core point (in fact, I completely agree with it). I was just clarifying that in the case of the 787, it wasn’t the airline’s choice.

Weird then that the seats they install in Airbus jets are distinct from the ones they install in Boeing jets.

Yes. huge bad on my part, mistaking nine for eleven. In my defence, I cite stupidity, parity error and failed arithmetic in kindy twice.

The eight-vs-nine thing, very quickly becomes the ten-vs-elevn thing in larger widebody jets. Its a double squeeze: both on the functional seat width, and on the consequence of 3 or 4 or 5 abreast seating and the middle seat passenger.