[Obadiah]

The aircraft are lighter, the aircraft could fly faster, they'll burn far less fuel and fly higher.

"Could" being the key operative word in this statement. My guess is that, yes, the plane would be lighter and - potentially - faster and more fuel efficient.

Sure, the plane indeed would be lighter, and could fly faster, but the reality is more likely that the plane will be lighter, be windowless, and fly at the exact same current speeds to further reduce fuel consumption and increase profits.

The bottom line here is that this is like buying a 16 ounce box of cornflakes today and paying the same price tomorrow for a 10 ounce box of the same "improved" cornflakes.

[Political Junkie Too]

What good is one plane flying faster when it is slotted into a route with other planes flying at older speeds?

-PJ

[snoringbear]

“Sure, the plane indeed would be lighter, and could fly faster, but the reality is more likely that the plane will be lighter, be windowless, and fly at the exact same current speeds to further reduce fuel consumption and increase profits.”

The speed of sound (Mach 1.0) at 35,000 ft is about 660 mph. I think Emirates flies A380’s on many of their long haul flights. The A380 service ceiling is 43,000 ft, cruise speed is 587 mph/mach 0.89. So, the plane is already bumping against max performance for a sub-sonic aircraft....