A 380 (Merged)

[FlyboyUK]

Pretty impressive sight!:ok:

A380 (http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=687497&WxsIERv=QWlyYnVzIEEzODAtODQx&WdsYXMg=QWlyYnVzIEluZHVzdHJpZQ%3D%3D&QtODMg=VG91bG91c2UgLSBCbGFnbmFjIChUTFMgLyBMRkJPKQ%3D%3D&ERDLTkt=RnJhbmNl&ktODMp=T2N0b2JlciA2LCAyMDA0&BP=0&WNEb25u=RnJlbmNoIEZyb2dzIEFpclNsaWRlcw%3D%3D&xsIERvdWdsY=Ri1XV0RE&MgTUQtODMgKE=Q2Fub24gMzAwRCBJc284MDAgZjYuMyA5MG1tIDEvNjBlIFN pZ21hIDE4LzUwKQ%3D%3D&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=ODM1OQ%3D%3D&NEb25uZWxs=MjAwNC0xMC0xMA%3D%3D&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=MDA0&static=yes)

A380(2) (http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=684291&WxsIERv=QWlyYnVzIEEzODAtODQx&WdsYXMg=QWlyYnVzIEluZHVzdHJpZQ%3D%3D&QtODMg=VG91bG91c2UgLSBCbGFnbmFjIChUTFMgLyBMRkJPKQ%3D%3D&ERDLTkt=RnJhbmNl&ktODMp=T2N0b2JlciA2LCAyMDA0&BP=0&WNEb25u=RnJlbmNoIEZyb2dzIEFpclNsaWRlcw%3D%3D&xsIERvdWdsY=Ri1XV0RE&MgTUQtODMgKE=VmVyeSBlYXJseSB0aGlzIG1vcm5pbmcgKDA2MDBaKSwgVG9 1bG91c2Ugd2FrZXMgdXAuIEFmdGVyIGxvbmcgaG91cnMgb2Ygd2FpdGluZyw gSSBjYW4gZmluYWxseSBzZWUgdGhlIGJpZ2dlc3QgY29tbWVyY2lhbCBwbGF uZSBvZiB0aGUgd29ybGQgZmluYWxseSBpbiBoaXMgdG90YWxpdHkuIEVuam9 5IEd1eXMgISEhIChDYW5vbiAzMDBEIElzbzQwMCBmNi4zIDE4bW0gMS8yNWU gU2lnbWEgMTgvNTAp&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=ODU4MzQ%3D&NEb25uZWxs=MjAwNC0xMC0wNg%3D%3D&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=MDA0&static=yes)

[L337]

It will never fly. It has no engines, and lots of holes in it!

:p

L337

[rotornut]

Isn't that 747FOCAL standing under the wing?;)

[jonathanm5]

What happened to MSN001, MSN002, MSN003. If built does anybody know what bits are connected - even better any photographs?

[Huck]

Hope it's just the perspective (or maybe the lack of paint), but that thing's got the curb appeal of a Shorts mated with a Beluga.

[Farrell]

It's big isn't it! :p

[cringe]

A380 MSNs in order of construction: 001, 004, 002, 007, 003, 005, 006. The aircraft with MSNs 001 and 004 will be the first and the second to fly. They will be used for airframe and systems certification. 002 and 007 will be used for cabin and route trials. 003 will be the first aircraft delivered to Singapore Airlines.

From:

http://www.flightdailynews.com/farnborough2004/07_19/airtransport/mega.shtm

http://www.luftfahrtstandort-hamburg.de/relaunch/html/subdokumente/sub_aero380_1.shtml

Airframes intended for ground testing only are numbered 5000 and 5001.

[Lu Zuckerman]

Hopefully if they have a roll out ceremony the weather is good. In the case of the A-310 they had a roll in ceremony. There were two problems. First the aircraft was sitting outside of the production hangar and everyone coming to the ceremony could see the aircraft. Secondly it was raining. When the roll in started all of the executives from the airlines and major subcontractors were sitting down in the area that would be covered by the right wing when the aircraft was in place for the ceremony. The aircraft was towed in and when it stopped several hundred gallons of rainwater came spilling down on the dignitaries. Just imagine if the same thing happened with the A-380?

:O :E :E :O

[jettison valve]

It´s an ugly, fat beast, or - given the electrical load on the ground - a "stubby power pig"!

Been to TLS two weeks ago, had a look at MSN004:
- Impressive cockpit (windows like DC-10/MD-11)
- HUGE stabilizer compartment (like a cathedral!)
- who´s going to repair the aft pressure bulkhead (composite!) if damaged?!

My head says it´ll fly - my stomach says it won´t... ;-)

Cheers,
J.V.

[MasterBates]

Does it retract the towtruck?

[Arkroyal]

Most amused by the copyright French Frogs Airslides logo on the pic.

Aeroplane? But ugly

[Anti-ice]

Good luck to Airbus with it - its a big beast, wouldn't want to be in charge of the cabin myself though :uhoh:

You should see the b1tchin going on about it from users in the US about it on ,dare i say it, Airliners.net - frankly quite amusing !
They can't bear to think that for one moment someone else may have a good idea and do something about it.

Perhaps Boeing could learn a lesson here, they maybe took it for granted for too long that they were the worlds biggest airliner producer - and did a good job too - but 777 aside,, have come up with nothing really new for 20 years now.
737NG is a rehash, 757 production recently halted, 767 sales very minimal and 777 a success but slowing too.
Hope the 7E7 launch is as impressive as it is made out to be, and will there be a 747 derivative soon ?

[747FOCAL]

How did you guess rotornut? :)

[ICT_SLB]

In fact it was an American idea first - ever seen the drawings for the MD-12? Virtually identical.

[747FOCAL]

The 747 was originally double decker all the way to the back as well. :p

[Loose rivets]

'don't like the look of that bit of old 2 bi 4 supporting the fin in the first link.

[vitamin B]

I guess I must be showing my age a bit but the idea isn't new. If my memory serves me correct the old Boeing 'Stratocruiser' was a double decker

vB

[eal401]

Don't recall anyone saying the idea was new. :rolleyes:

[swh]

747Focal....

Yes I can see the double decker all the way to the back as well ....

http://www.aviationpics.de/test/tri_747.jpg

[rotaryman]

When Pigs Fly!! LOL Ooops....:E


Its all very well building these Huge Planes! But, how many airports world wide can handle them ???

I know Sydney is spending Huge money to straighten and widen taxiways / installing Guard lights etc etc and now appears to be running behind schedule! with the Major airlines argueing the Toss! over cost recovery etc etc...expected to be about 100 million dollars.

Singapore airlines being the first to Operate this Aircraft. umm Jan 2005 i believe. :E

[Flap 5]

It's all been said before ... when Boeing brought out the 747. It's too big. Airports can't handle it. It's done pretty well over the years though hasn't it?

[Buster Hyman]

Does it come in blue?

[Clear_Prop]

Quick reaction for all the nay-sayers putting this thing down because it's not new, or somebody drew it on the back of a fag packet in the sixties or whatever:

Anybody can think these things up, but making them a reality is the hard bit - where the history making is!

Just my 2p.

[phnuff]

Do the different colours on the fusilage indicate which country built which bit?

[747FOCAL]

swh,

That is such an old picture, but nowhere near as old as the original. If the pictures of the concept models(for the double decker 747) weren't so highly proprietary I would throw them on PPRUNE. :p

Ps. The 747 in present design can never have less than 4 engines. :rolleyes:

[bekolblockage]

Think I'll wait for the stretched version.

[eal401]

swh, now THAT is an ugly aircraft! :yuk:

[Momo]

The reason the second deck was put on the 747 orignally was that they believed that it would mainly be used as a front-loading freighter, if memory serves. Two full decks were not considered.

Momo

[MSF]

The original 747 was in competition with the C5 for the large airlifter contract

[aviate1138]

MSF said,

"The original 747 was in competition with the C5 for the large airlifter contract"


Ah! So the 747 was originally designed as a Military project to go into production? Like the 707? Funny how Boeing have one set of financial rules and don't like any alternatives.

Looking forward to years of A380 success. Don't suppose there will be a Military version for a while.

Aviate 1138

[747FOCAL]

Momo - Two full decks were considered until Boeing decided they did not think they could pas PAX EVAC test. To many doors would be required. :E

[Huck]

You should see the b1tchin going on about it from users in the US about it

Not everywhere in the US. My company is the launch customer for the freight version.

It is also #1 on my bid sheet right now. I figure - 16 hour legs - dozing for dollars - a couple of round trips to HKG every month and I'm done!

By the way, the 747 was seen as a long-term freighter, short-term pax bird, for we were all to be flying SST's by now. Hence the upper deck to optimize for freight.

[Toulouse]

Just to keep you all informed. According to the news I've heard this morning on numerous local radio stations here in Toulouse, Airbus have announced the official public presentation of the A380 on next January 18th here in Blagnac (Toulouse). Numerous EU dignatories will be present for the event. They are however saying that this will be two months before the first test flight, so if true, while many were expecting the first flight in February, it would appear it won't be util mid March.

[hobie]

Mid March ...... wow!!!! :ok:

[rotornut]

Plus Thai is about to order 6 380s, probably in the next few days.

[747FOCAL]

Not what I heard. Its supposed to fly January 18, 2005.

Superjumbo to take to sky within weeks
Aircraft to be launched in Toulouse on January 18

Daily Post ( Liverpool) 11/24/04
author: Steve Bagnall

THE first Airbus super jumbos will take to the sky within weeks, company bosses yesterday revealed.

Commercial A380 flights are likely to start in 2006, with airlines still queuing up to buy the massive plane, the wings for which are manufactured at Airbus UK in Broughton, Flintshire.

Prime minister Tony Blair is expected to be at the revolutionary aircraft"s launch on January 18 in Toulouse, France.

The heads of state from Germany, Spain and France -- countries with Airbus factories contributing to the project -- are likely to be at the unveiling.

Scores of employees from Broughton have been invited to a repeat unveiling the day after, with hundreds of workers watching the momentous occasion on massive screens at the North Wales factory.

Six pairs of wings have already gone to Toulouse from Broughton, via barge and ship, for the final assembly.

Speaking yesterday at the French Airbus HQ in Toulouse, Broughton"s head of wing manufacturing Brian Fleet, said 139 aircraft -- 122 public service and 17 freighters -- are set to be delivered to airlines worldwide, including Virgin, Singapore and Air France.

Mr Fleet said: "This really is an international business.

"The first flight will be making aviation history. ""

In the last 12 months, another five airlines have joined the clamour to buy the 550-seater jumbo, including Korean and Malaysian.

Four aircrafts are being completed at a massive hanger at Airbus Toulouse, one of which will be unveiled in January.

More than 60 airports will see the A380 before 2010.

The A380F freighter fleet will enter service midway through to 2008.

Airbus bosses promised the super jumbo will revolutionise the burgeoning air travel industry and provide a solution to increasing plane traffic. It is estimated the number of passengers will double in 15 years worldwide.

By 2016, Airbus bosses said the 60, 000 A380 flights will move 10m more passengers through Heathrow without an increase in flights.

Currently a team of specialists from Broughton are over in Toulouse helping to finish off the super jumbos.

Mark Hibbert, 36, from Gwernaffield, near Mold, said: "It is awesome. It is a project we will never be able to work on again. There will not be another project like this.

"We have been working flat out to get the test flight sorted out. ""

[Nippy]

It is a truly marvelous sight to see these wings sailing down the river Dee on their specialy made "Barge", I work next to the river in Queensferry North Wales, and when the wings are dispatched, it always draws a crowd as they sail by. They were getting ready to send another wing tonight as I drove by the factory in the dark! they managed to run the barge aground on a sandbank earlier in the year, so I hope they leave the trip till the morning!
Cheers:ok:

[supercarb]

Not what I heard. Its supposed to fly January 18, 2005.

January 18 is the rollout, not the first flight.

[747FOCAL]

Then why is Noel saying it will fly Jan 18, 2005?

[NZLeardriver]

Brian Fleet

Is that name for real?

[Toulouse]

747 Focal, I'd just say it's usual bad journalism. I live about 8 km from Toulouse airport and what they're saying here (and witin Airbus is roll out on Jan 18 2005, first flight by March...

[supercarb]

http://www.thisisbristol.com/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=145176&command=displayContent&sourceNode=144906&contentPK=11370389

Bristol Evening Post
11:00 - 24 November 2004

The world will get its first sight of what makers Airbus say is the future of air travel when the double decker A380 is unveiled, complete, in January. The Evening Post got a sneak preview yesterday at the final assembly line in Toulouse. Business editor CHLOE RIGBY reports

On January 18, 2005, the next big thing in air travel will be revealed to a waiting public. That is when the covers will come off A380 number 001, at the Toulouse site where it is currently in final assembly.

The maiden flight of that first completed double decker passenger jet will take place a few weeks later, on a date yet to be set but forecast to be in the first three months of next year.

The superjumbo A380 has been in the planning for years but now makers Airbus, who employ about 5,000 people at Filton, are almost ready to show off their new flagship plane - one they say will help meet the growing public demand for long-distance air travel at affordable prices.

Airbus UK managing director Iain Gray said: "It is the product out of all of our range that people will identify and recognise in the air - it is the dawning of a new era."

He added: "It is terrific to work on - it is the best.

"The is the largest and the best project going on in commercial aerospace and it is great to be part of that. It is so exciting."

The thinking behind the new £11 billion plane-building programme is that the number of people flying will rise by five per cent a year in the next 20 years and that, at the same time, ticket prices will continue to fall.

To put that many passengers on the type of planes currently in service would create congestion in the air and exceed the capacity of most modern airports. So the Airbus solution is to build bigger planes.

"One of the problems the A380 will solve most significantly is that of congestion," says Corrin Higgs, senior marketing analyst at Airbus.

"Airports such as Heathrow, JFK and Narita, Tokyo, are all congested because people want to fly there - they have large, wealthy populations.

"But they were built many years ago to take a relatively small amount of passenger traffic.

"It is not easy to allow more flights to take off from these airports, so having larger planes is one answer.

"Another would be to have larger airports outside cities, but that is very unpopular with the people who live where those airports would be."

Heathrow planning and development director Eryl Smith has said he believes that the forecast 60,000 A380 flights in and out of the airport each year by 2016 would allow nearly 10 million more passengers to fly to and from the airport with no increase in flights.

The A380 is also about cutting costs: it is reckoned to be fuel efficient, quiet and with lower emissions than the rival Boeing 747-400. One of the two optional engines for the plane is the new Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine, certificated two weeks ago and produced at the Bristol employer's Derby site.

Airbus says the plane will consume three litres of fuel per person every 100 kilometres.

That kind of cost saving statistic leads in turn to cheaper ticket prices.

Mr Higgs said: "Airlines face a constant fall in ticket prices of one to two per cent a year.

"Airlines must cut their costs more than that or they get to the point where you can't sell the seat for what it costs you."

At the same time it will carry up to 555 people in a two-deck layout on 14-hour flights.

It is also, say Airbus directors, very significant for advanced engineering in the UK and Europe.

Brian Fleet, head of the wing centre of excellence at Filton and Broughton, said: "Some of the best manufacturing engineers in the world are here.

"There is nothing that can compare in terms of size.

"Aerospace really is an area where we can say we are a leader, and Airbus is the leader in the field."

That will be reflected, he says, when the company's turnover rises to £24.5 billion to £28 billion (35 to 40 billion euros) from the current £21 billion (30 billion euros), making it Europe's biggest manufacturer.

At the same time its deliveries will rise from current levels of just over 300 aircraft last year to 450 in 2006, and increasing.

Concorde was also produced in Filton, where today 1,000 of the 5,000 employees at the site are working on the wings, landing gear and fuel systems.

In terms of value, 20 per cent of the plane will be built in the UK, and where Rolls-Royce engines are used, that will rise to 35 per cent.

Over the next four years, the speed of A380 production will rise to 48 a year.

Work is going on in one of Europe's largest industrial buildings - the hangar where work on six planes is currently under way measures 250 metres wide, by 490 metres long and 46 metres high.

Of the planes inside, two are static test planes, while the MSN001 will be the first to fly next year, followed by the MSN004 and the MSN002. The MSN007 will be the first into commercial service, with Singapore Airlines, a year later.

US rival Boeing has countered Airbus' argument in favour of larger aeroplanes with its belief in faster travel - it is now developing the 7E7 Dreamliner, which it says will be faster, although smaller.

But Airbus appears to be carrying the day, with 139 firm orders and commitments from 13 airlines for the A380 and the freighter version of the plane.

The first airline to fly it will be Singapore Airlines, in the second quarter of 2006, but other buyers include Air France, Korean Air, Virgin Atlantic, Emirates and Qantas.

Between them, those airlines expect it to be flying on routes to 60 airports by 2010, including Heathrow and possibly Manchester, and that more operators, including the yet-to-sign-up British Airways, will decide to take it on once they have seen it in action.

Indeed, Airbus sees every airline flying Boeing 747s as a potential customer for the A380, which comes with a list price of £181.9 million.

[FlyingBeetle]

hi Toulouse,
please keep us updated if you find out more about the first flight. although i fly a boeing i wouldn't miss to see it in the world :{ . its gonna be a great aircraft. :ok:

[Toulouse]

Sure thing Flyingbeetle. Whenever I hear anything about a confirmed date for first flight I'll let you know.
Toulouse is a nice place to visit. I'm alreday worrying about the logistics of seeing the 380's first flight as Toulouse is alreday filled with aviation entusiasts an well as professionals and even on a quiet day things get quite busy by the viewing areas of Toulouse Blagnac's runways, and the day of the 3870's first flight should be a BUSY one.:ok:

[panda-k-bear]

I'm sure they'll just let any old Tom, Dick and Harry wander round. Why not?

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[Inverted81]

Whats wrong with the name Fleet eh?????? eh???? lol :cool:

C FLEET!!!

[regitaekilthgiwt]

Better than Brad Breath

[Algy]

Here's what's going on. (http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/07/18/207894/The+race+to+rewire+A380.html)

[Two's in]

It is certainly a candid admission of where the fundamental risk strategies employed by Airbus regarding the balance of design freeze versus production simply did not work out. Although the final customers may be commercially on the hook for some of the delays and cost generated by changing the specification or requirement after the freeze point, ultimately it is Airbus' name that gets the hammering and the shareholders who pay the price. Although Airbus have apparently relied on extensive use of Computer Aided Design and Manufacture, it is a salutary lesson that the realities of life are often more unpredictable or random than any computer modelling can be.

[Huck]

As painful and expensive as it is, a full flight test program that was completed before locking in the design would have spared them all of this. A lesson learned every generation in this business. I cut my teeth in th eighties at Lockheed, and heard water-cooler tales of the C-5A program's disasterous FT program (~16 aircraft were concurrently in various stages of production, with design changes issued daily as tests showed problems....)

[parabellum]

A little French bird told me, very recently, that the primary problems with the A380 are not the electrics or changed specifications at all, that is just a smoke screen which enables Airbus to put part of the blame on the customers as it is not totally untrue.

The primary problem, I was told, is that the aircraft cannot safely taxy as Airbus refused to pay Boeing for the patent to a steerable body gear and now they are suffering as they simply cannot get it safely around the corners at many of the intended airports, JFK springs to mind.

Don't shoot the messenger!:=

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

If it can't manage JFK, how on earth does it manage at Farnborough ?

[Trash Hauler]

parabellum

I wood think Boeings body gear steering was patented nearly 40 years ago? I thought US patents only lasted from 14 to 20 years (distinct from copyright that can last up to 120 years). I think your "french" connection is spreading furphies!

TH

[parabellum]

Like I said - Don't shoot the messenger.

Apparently it can make it round the corners OK at light weights but when any reasonable load is carried it puts unacceptable loads on the u/c and scrubs the tyres to bits, so I have been told.

As far as patents go can't comment but if I had been Boeing I would have made some improvements to the system along the way, especially when the -400F came out, and re-patented it.

[topoftheloop]

We had a briefing recently with one of the test pilots.
According to him there is no such problem whatsoever.
The A380 can operate out of any airport which can
handle a 747.

[parabellum]

Well that's OK then - just as long as it can exit on a 45 degree fast exit and make a 135 degree turn on to the parrallel no problem as rolling to the end every time isn't really an option.

Funny though, it was an Airbus Industries pilot that I was talking to!

[A2QFI]

Like I said - Don't shoot the messenger.
Apparently it can make it round the corners OK at light weights but when any reasonable load is carried it puts unacceptable loads on the u/c and scrubs the tyres to bits, so I have been told.
As far as patents go can't comment but if I had been Boeing I would have made some improvements to the system along the way, especially when the -400F came out, and re-patented it.

I am sure I saw photographs, somewhere on the internet, purporting to be a 380 u/c with the tyres scrubbed off the rims - taxying not landing was the claim.

[Trash Hauler]

A2QFI

The images of the tyre scrubbing was a test that had the castoring third axle locked and then towed to the maximum "towing" limits. The tyres did not come off the rims. The story is in Flight International and when I locate the link I will post it for you.

parabellum

The danger of repeating "I heard such and such" without applying intellectual rigger is of course getting shot :\ - particularly on pprune. However, I did not shoot you, only provide a balanced question to test the integrity of the original source.

Cheers

TH

[A2QFI]

TH thank you. I knew I had seen them but I must have glossed over the details and been side-tracked by the 'Shock/horror" implications!

[Taildragger67]

parabellum

I wood think Boeings body gear steering was patented nearly 40 years ago? I thought US patents only lasted from 14 to 20 years (distinct from copyright that can last up to 120 years). I think your "french" connection is spreading furphies!

TH

Lots of ways of extending the IP protection. F'rinstance, copyright in the designs would be one way - let's say Joe Sutter did the designs, he's still kicking, so the clock (at least in the UK) won't start until his time's up and then it's 50 years. The clock arguably won't start until the last 747 designer/draughtsman dies.

Also little tweaks might be patentable and then there's design protection.

Easier to just cough up!! IF that is the problem.

[Trash Hauler]

Ah yes, what a convoluted world IP and patents can be. The drug companies are very good at "varying" the design of a medication to claim a change to the patent and so prevent others using the compound. In their business it is hard to produce a medication that performs the same as a competitor without using the patented compounds and copyrighted IP.

Even if Boeing extend the patent through variation of the existing design it would not prevent Airbus now designigning a steerable body gear as long they ensure they do not use specific details of the Boeing designs which (presumably) would still be protected IP in the form of copyright.

[forget]

"What a convoluted world IP and patents can be". Not so, in this case. IF Boeing had a patent on steerable body gear then it would have lasted 20 years from the date of application, and is long expired. After expiry anyone can use it. IF Boeing has added a few widgets, to keep them ahead of the competition, the orirginal patent, less the widgets, is still useable by anyone. Also, I'd question the issue of "IP in the form of copyright". The detailed engineering drawings will be copyright, but Airbus ain't in the business of building cloned Boeing bogies.

I don't believe that the A-380 lacks steerable body gear because of a patent issue. On the other hand, I do believe it has a big problem because it doesn't have steerable body gear:uhoh:

Hmmm. Having just checked the US Patent Office, this may be the one.

United States Patent 5,242,131
Watts September 7, 1993
Steerable landing gear
Abstract
A six wheel, three axle, bogie type main landing gear for an airplane is retractable as a unit and is provided with a rearward set of wheels or a forward set of wheels that is steerable with respect to the non-rotatable bogie beam. The set of wheels turns in response to steering of the nose wheel past a given angle. A wheel assembly is mounted for rotation with respect to a vertical shaft supported by a fork extending longitudinally of the beam, and a pair of hydraulic cylinders turns the wheel axles with respect to the beam.

Inventors: Watts; John (Redmond, WA)
Assignee: The Boeing Company (Seattle, WA)
Appl. No.: 865066
Filed: April 8, 1992

[Algy]

...is here. (http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2005/07/19/200365/Airbus+abuses+A380%e2%80%99s+main+landing+gear.html)

[forget]

So who convinced me that the A-380 doesn't have steerable gear.
Moral - Don't believe everything you read:ugh: :ugh:

[Trash Hauler]

I know the article linked above claims steerable gear however from what I have read (he says this digging in the grey matter for site he read it on) it is passive steering. The aft pair of wheels on the tripple bogie can castor when "unlocked" rather than be actively steered.

TH

*******************

See my next post (#20) for correction of duff gen above.

[forget]

So - on a push back the castoring wheels will be locked up. Heavy aircraft, tight turns, scrubbing tyres, - problems perchance? What happened to those photographs of a ripped up taxiway?

[Trash Hauler]

Having stretched the grey matter I have found the text of the article on my PC and it clearly says the main gear is steerable.

Sorry about the duff gen in my previous post. The article is below in full:

********************************

Air Transport

Airbus A380 Gear Put Through Drills

Aviation Week & Space Technology

07/25/2005, page 42

Michael A. Dornheim
Los Angeles
Robert Wall
Paris

A380 tires damage airport surface during 'abusive' turn test

Gear Concerns

Airbus is being forced to respond to Internet-circulated pictures of A380 tow tests, which show the landing gear carving grooves in the asphalt during turns sharper than normal limits. Reaction pushed the company to issue a letter to "airline focal points" on July 19.

Officials at Airbus and Goodrich, which engineered and builds the main landing gear, insist the results validate their design and they do not plan any changes. "Although spectacular for the non-specialist, actual deformations are not as high as on some other aircraft," Airbus wrote to the airlines. "Preliminary results confirm the design values of loads and deformations."

But while they are happy with the gear, others--such as airport operators--see the torn tarmac and wonder what will happen to their property. Some want more information, such as how strong the damaged asphalt was.

The June 25 tow tests at Toulouse were intended to stress the landing gear during "abusive cases" outside normal operation, Airbus says. During the trials, the gross weight was 546 metric tons (1,204,000 lb.); maximum takeoff weight for the aircraft is 560 tons. The tests consisted of "towing and pushback maneuvers at high weight, with various nose-landing-gear steering angles ranging from typical operational values up to extreme cases, close to bottoming of steering actuators, beyond the allowed towing/pushback limits," Airbus says.

Maximum steering angle for the A380 during towing will be restricted to a standard 60 deg., Airbus says. The tests were performed at 60 deg. and higher, reaching a maximum of 72 deg.

"Given the gear deformation buildup, no truck driver would ever bring the aircraft to the extreme steering angles achieved during this particular loads testing," Airbus says.

The A380 has four main landing gear, two on the body with six-wheel trucks and two on the wing with four-wheel trucks. The wing gear are forward of the body gear. On an aircraft with a simpler single-axle main landing gear, the axes of the nosewheel and the main wheels intersect at the center of the turning radius. But multiple main gear axles form parallel lines that can't intersect at the turning center, and some of the tires have to scrub laterally in a turn. The sharper the turn, the more they scrub. The Boeing 747 alleviates this problem by steering the body gear at low speeds so the axes point toward a common turning center, which reduces scrubbing.

THE ENTIRE A380 body gear doesn't steer, but the aft axle does steer on the six-wheel trucks. If the body steering mechanism is inoperative, the A380 can be dispatched with the wheels aligned and locked. The wing gear do not steer at all. In these photos, it is the wing gear that are scrubbing. The tests were the first in a series to check A380 ground handling. In August-September, Airbus plans to assess minimum turn radius at heavy weight and taxiing the aircraft with engines running. U-turns are also on the to-do list.

Airbus officials have begun trying to explain the situation, saying the tests marked a positive step in verifying that the A380 can taxi using FAA Design Group V or ICAO Code E runway/taxiway systems--a standard measure for those surfaces.

FOR THE JUNE 25 TEST, body wheel steering was deactivated. The aircraft was near its maximum weight, with an aft center of gravity, to represent a worst-case condition. The test procedure consisted in towing/pushing the aircraft out and into a turn. When the turn radius was stabilized, the aircraft was stopped, and pictures of the landing gear were taken.

Airbus officials note that given the roughly 90F temperature on the day of the test, and the fact that the aircraft was turned beyond set limits, "it is not abnormal to have some local deterioration of the asphalt." But one airport official quipped: "Ninety degrees? Is that all?"

Three tires were replaced after the test. This wasn't mandatory, Airbus says, but helped with the flight test schedule.

Airbus expects the A380 to be able to perform U-turns in a similar or smaller space than the A340-600 due to its shorter wheelbase. Moreover, the company points out that with 20 main landing gear wheels, the per-wheel weight on the A380 is lower than Boeing's 777-300ER.

[PAXboy]

From the Flight article mentioned above:He says the build-up in outstanding work resulted from the policy last year to ship subassemblies to Toulouse incomplete, rather than hold them back and cause a bottleneck. "As each milestone in the build process was reached, if the required work had not been finished then the assemblies were delivered to the final assembly line uncompleted to avoid slowing the production rate," he says.That is standard practice for any company these days. They always want to show that they are on target, even if they are not. It is unfortunate that investors and managers no longer have the confidence to make the customer wait until it is ready. This is one of the main downsides to strong competition. A simple alternative example of this problem is Microsoft, who have made it (almost) part of the development process to release software very early and get the customer to do much of the testing, hence the stricture never to buy the first release of anything.

The problem of photographs being aired out of context is a singularly modern one. People know that money is to be made from these photographs and the explanation is always running behind. This is most unfortuante and - in this instance - Airbus have my sympathy. For having shipped assemblies that are not yet complete, they do not.

[misd-agin]

The comments are related to the body gear and if it steers or castors. Two posts prior the article states that the taxiway damage came from the wing gear. Might be a completely different problem.

[forget]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/0102050713900.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/0102050714400.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/0102050713900.jpg

[tilewood]

Forget

Your's is the most sensible comment anyone has made all week!! ;)

[TSR2]

Must have been leaning damned hard !!!!!!

[forget]

Being mildly curious as to how the Boeing 747-8 competes with the A-380 I took a look at the Seattle site. Here's B's condensed comparisons. No wonder heads have rolled in Toulouse!

---------------
This latest family of the 747 jetliners meets airline requirements for a passenger airplane that serves the 400- to 500-seat market between the 555-seat Airbus A380 and the 365-seat Boeing 777-300 Extended Range airplanes, and a freighter that continues the leadership of the 747 Freighter family in the world cargo market.

The 747-8 Intercontinental is more than 12 percent lighter per seat than the A380, and consumes 11 percent less fuel per passenger. That translates into a trip-cost reduction of 22 percent and a seat-mile cost reduction of more than 4 percent compared to the A380.

The 747-8 is the only large airplane that fits today's airport infrastructure, giving airlines the flexibility to fly to more destinations. The 747-8 will build on the current 747's capability to fly into most airports worldwide, using the same pilot type ratings, services and most ground support equipment. With a range of over 14,815 km (8,000 nmi), the 747-8 Intercontinental can connect nearly any major city pair in the world.

The 747-8 Intercontinental is 11 percent more fuel efficient than the A380, and offers guaranteed QC2 departures.

The 747-8 Freighter's empty weight is 86 tonnes (95 tons) lighter than the A380 freighter. This results in a 25 percent lower fuel burn per ton, which translates into 20 percent lower trip costs and 23 percent lower ton-mile costs than the A380F.

[27/09]

According to him there is no such problem whatsoever.
The A380 can operate out of any airport which can
handle a 747.

I have seen this statement before, why then are airports that currently handle the 747 upgrading runways and taxiways and saying they are preparing for the A380?

[PAXboy]

forget thanks for the advertising blurb from Mr Bojangles ... Let us not forget that, once they actually build the thing, they may find that it is not all as they planned! In the same way that Airbus are finding their new baby is heavier than they planned, Boeing may find that:-
The 747-8 Intercontinental is not more than 12 percent lighter per seat than the A380, and consumes 11 6 percent less fuel per passenger.

I have no doubt that the 748i will sell well, as will the A380 but marketing blurbs about a machine that is still on paper are always good for a laugh. No need to tell me that the machine already exists and, therefore, is not paper - since it is not yet built, then it is paper. The fact that it may have a fine heritage falls away when they are going to have to use many new materials in order to make it as light as they say it will be. Actually, they are saying that the 748i is lighter than the A380 when they should be saying that it will be lighter. But salesman are never one to let grammar get in the way of a sale!
__________________
"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different."
Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

[Volume]

The 747-8 Intercontinental is more than 12 percent lighter per seat than the A380
Even if this statement would be an engineering statement, and no marketing statement (called lie before political correctness became popular), it is still half of the truth.
Of course a structure designed and certified per 1960s rules is much lighter than a modern one. Different crashworthiness requirements, damage tolerant structure, larger rapid decompression hole size, different uncontained engine failure rules etc. costs weight and gains safety. Of course a 1960s Renault 4 is lighter per passenger seat than a 2006 Renault Megane, but would you buy one today, if you could ? Even if it would be equiped with a 21st century fuel economic engine and tinted glass windows ?

[Hunter58]

Oh, of course I would buy the Renault 4 (no tinted Windows please), but not for it's new engine but for the nostalgia involved... ;)

I am just not sure that the nostalgia argument would effectively work for an aircraft...

[bekolblockage]

I think Volume's analogy is quite a good one. Watch the kilos pile on when the SMS requirements start to bite.

[Taildragger67]

"designed and certified in the 1960s"...

I think the 744 was certified as a new type (not a variant) due to the completely new wing, avionics, etc. and incorporating the the s.41 lessons, etc. whilst the 744ER was a variant of the 744.

If that's the case, then surely the 748, with new wing, engines fuselage stretch plugs, new materials and structures in critical places, etc. will also have to be certified as a new type?

My point being that whilst the overall shape might be retained (a deliberate decision, Boeing having done consumer studies to show that it is a design which is recognised and trusted by the consuming public, hence incorporates a large element of goodwill), the actual stuff under the skin will be pretty well all new.

Given that it will be first-flying in the 21st century, I'd suggest it will have to meet 21st century requirements for a new type in areas such as "... crashworthiness requirements, damage tolerant structure, larger rapid decompression hole size, different uncontained engine failure rules etc."

How many of you own a Porsche 911? Get online and Google-up a 911 family tree. You can trace the shape back to the 956 but no-one in their right mind would say they're the same underneath. But the punters recognise the shape as a Porsche so that's what the manufacturers have stuck with. The 911 of 2006 has a similar look (a few aerodynamic changes, etc. - rather like a new wing!) to that of 1969 but they're different beasts. Same with the 747 family.

[lomapaseo]

"designed and certified in the 1960s"...

Not a very significant statement. The idea behind certification is to certify it safe today. New concepts need apply today's knowledge both in their design and certification. Old concepts which have seasoned experience under continued airworthiness review certainly have less questions to answer.

[Groundloop]

Not a very significant statement. The idea behind certification is to certify it safe today. New concepts need apply today's knowledge both in their design and certification. Old concepts which have seasoned experience under continued airworthiness review certainly have less questions to answer.

Boeing managed to get the 737NG certified as a variant of previous 737s, even with a completely new wing. If they had had to meet the latest requirements significant changes would have had to have been made to the fuselage to meet emergency exit requirements. Compare the exits on an A321 (certified under newer requirements) with those on the 737-800 and 737-900 which used old 737 "grandfather rights".

[AUTOGLIDE]

Even if this statement would be an engineering statement, and no marketing statement (called lie before political correctness became popular), it is still half of the truth.
Of course a structure designed and certified per 1960s rules is much lighter than a modern one. Different crashworthiness requirements, damage tolerant structure, larger rapid decompression hole size, different uncontained engine failure rules etc. costs weight and gains safety. Of course a 1960s Renault 4 is lighter per passenger seat than a 2006 Renault Megane, but would you buy one today, if you could ? Even if it would be equiped with a 21st century fuel economic engine and tinted glass windows ?

Also doesn't state which A380 variant.

[the_hawk]

Havent they already got an order in for A380(F)......?
They switched their two 380F orders to the passenger version:
http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/05/16/Navigation/177/206661/Airbus+A380+Freighter+delayed+as+Emirates+switches+orders+to +passenger.html

[lomapaseo]

Boeing managed to get the 737NG certified as a variant of previous 737s, even with a completely new wing. If they had had to meet the latest requirements significant changes would have had to have been made to the fuselage to meet emergency exit requirements. Compare the exits on an A321 (certified under newer requirements) with those on the 737-800 and 737-900 which used old 737 "grandfather rights".


Not true. The B737-800 met the same standards as the A321 albeit not in the same way. The regulations in an attempt to permit novel or new concepts, do accept alternate means of compliance as long as there is no loss of comparitive safety. However, where new and novel design approaches are employed, such alternate means or equivalency may have to be published beforehand for public comment. This was done via the Federal register and coments for and against were recieved. After review of these coments the FAA found that the equivalent or alternate means of compliance met or exceeded the basis of the rule for the B737-800.

[FE Hoppy]

From the original article "For example, the A380 is the first airliner to incorporate a complex electronic "central nervous system" - dubbed the network server system - and is also the first to feature electrically operated passenger doors "

Central nervous system- what like the ASCB-D on primus Epic systems?

electrically operated passenger doors - what like the L1011?


Not much new stuff really.

[Volume]

I think the 744 was certified as a new type
If in doubt, check it out :
The
FAA 747 TCDS Nr. A20WE (http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/b15f88cd21ef1f858625718b0067c34e/$FILE/A20WE.pdf) clearly shows, that all 747 variants are one type design, and the 747-8 most probably also will be.
Check page 15 and 16 for the new paragraphs, special conditions and excemptions introduced for the 747-400.

747-400 (continued):
Certification Basis: Part 25 of the FAR, effective February 1, 1965, as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-59
with the following exceptions:
SECTION NO. TITLE THRU AMDT.25-
25.107 Takeoff speeds 41
25.109 Accelerate-stop distance 41
25.149 Minimum control speed 41
25.251 Vibration and buffeting 22
25.305 Strength and deformation 22
25.331 General 45
25.351 Yawing conditions 45
25.365 Pressurized cabin loads 53
25.571 Damage-tolerance and fatigue
evaluation of structure 9
25.607 Fasteners 22
25.631 Bird Strike damage (NA)**
25.657 Hinges 22
25.675 Stops 37
25.683 Operation tests 22
25.772 Pilot compartment doors 46
25.773(b)(2)(ii) Pilot Compartment View 72
25.783 Doors 53
25.785 Seats, berths, safety belts, harnesses 50
25.787 Stowage Compartments 31
25.789 Retention of items of mass in passenger
and crew compartments 45
25.809 Emergency exit arrangement 45
25.812 Emergency lighting 31
25.832 Cabin ozone concentration (NA)**
25.858 Cargo compartment fire detections systems (NA)**
25.1103 Induction system ducts and air duct systems 45
25.1401 Anticollision light system 26
25.1438 Pressurization and pneumatic systems (NA)**
25.1529 Instructions for continued airworthiness (NA)**

etc.

So the 747 essentially is a 1960s design meeting 1960s safety standards.

[lomapaseo]

.......
So the 747 essentially is a 1960s design meeting 1960s safety standards.

At that time when initially certified.

In today's light it no doubt operates under numerous continued airworthiness advancements. These lessons learned as well as all approriate AD,s will no doubt be applied to any similar new designs.

[Taildragger67]

Volume,

Thanks, my understanding was wrong and I stand corrected.

[harpic]

This in Latest Spectator Magazine


A superjumbo-sized monument to Euro-folly
George Trefgarne

Jacques Chirac hit the nail on the head in 2002 when he opened a factory making components for the Airbus A380. The aircraft was, he said, ‘A symbol of what Europe can achieve.’ I could not put it better myself. As the vast 550-seat superjumbo wowed the crowd at Farnborough Air Show this week, there was no mistaking its significance. Conceived by French and German politicians; bureaucratic, expensive and dogged by scandal — the A380 is indeed a wonderful monument to the European Union.

In fact, so short is this engineering marvel on market logic that there is a small but distinct risk that it could bring down not only Airbus and its Franco–German parent company EADS, but the struggling premiership of the bouffant-haired Dominique de Villepin. There have already been some nasty scenes in the French parliament. And if that is not enough, Airbus could even ignite a vicious transatlantic trade war.

How appropriate, then, that Labour has got its fingerprints all over this Dome-with-wings. The DTI has spent the past four years trumpeting the government’s involvement, not least the provision of £780 million of launch aid to Airbus and engine-maker Rolls-Royce, in the form of ‘soft’ loans at below-market interest rates. Airbus is also the biggest customer of the Export Credits Guarantee Department, a quango which underwrites export orders. Last year it underwrote orders for 50 aircraft, a third of all its business. Airlines often go bust, which means the ECGD can suddenly find itself in possession of aircraft: according to its latest report and accounts it is now looking for buyers for 10 planes, though it does not reveal how many are Airbuses. Not content with that, Alistair Darling, the Trade and Industry Secretary, plans to appoint a director to the EADS board to ‘safeguard’ Britain’s interests. That, of course, is another characteristic of a Euro-project: the desire of successive British governments to jump on the careering bandwagon.

At Farnborough the punters were optimistic that Airbus would survive. Most of them agreed with the arch-optimist Tony Blair, who said at the unveiling of the A380 last year, ‘This is the most exciting new aircraft in the world, a symbol of economic strength and technical innovation. Above all, it is a symbol of confidence that we can compete and win in the global market.’ The show is attended by aircraft nuts who regard an overspend or delay in a project as par for the course. They have learnt through long experience that aerospace companies are inherently political and they remember that only a short time ago Boeing was mired in corruption and a bonking scandal. For them, there is something romantic about the A380 and the bold vision it represents.

But things look pretty dire. Two months ago BAE Systems, the company still known as British Aerospace to most people, announced it was going to sell its 20 per cent stake in Airbus. The rest of Airbus is owned by EADS, a company quoted in Paris and Frankfurt but part-owned by the French government. I remember thinking at the time, ‘Hello, what does Mike Turner [BAE’s feisty chief executive] know?’


For a moment, I thought it might have something to do with the Clearstream affair in France. An Airbus executive had been arrested for spreading a rumour that various public figures, including Nicolas Sarkozy, the interior minister, had taken kickbacks on a defence deal. Sarkozy was cleared. There was no connection with BAE’s decision to sell. Silly me, that was just a sideshow.

The more likely reason emerged a few weeks later, when EADS announced that the aircraft on which Airbus had bet the farm, the A380, would be delayed by six months due to problems with its electrics. EADS shares plunged by a third. Poor old BAE looked as if it would receive less for its stake than the £2.5 billion the City expected. This was confirmed a few weeks later when N.M. Rothschild, the merchant bank, independently assessed the stake to be worth less than £2 billion.

Ever since then, everyone has been speculating about what N.M. Rothschild found. Its report is confidential, but the best guess is that it discovered Airbus’s figures to have been flattered by hedging contracts taken out to protect the company against currency swings, and by advances taken from customers for planes not yet delivered.

Events have since moved rapidly. It emerged that Noel Forgeard, one of the co-chief executives of EADS (under its charter one chief is French, the other German) had sold millions of euros worth of shares before the announcement of the A 380 delay. Forgeard, a former aide to Chirac, has now resigned — with three years’ salary, worth E6 million, in his pocket — and is being investigated. He has been replaced by Louis Gallois, head of France’s railways. And a law suit has been filed by French investors claiming that 150 other Airbus executives sold EADS shares just before the delays were revealed to the market.

But the politically significant, super-jumbo of a question is: what happens now? Not only is the A380 late, but orders for Airbus’s other aircraft have collapsed to half the level of Boeing’s. The real runaway success of the airline market is the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, which is much smaller than the A380 and, critically, more fuel-efficient. For the gas-guzzling A380 was conceived when oil was cheap and green politics was not even a twinkle in David Cameron’s eye. Furthermore, the A380 is so enormous that huge upgrades to airport terminals and baggage-handling areas are required to accommodate it. One tenth of the cost of Terminal Five at Heathrow has gone on modifications for the Airbus behemoth. Boeing reckons that, because of these costs imposed on airport operators, there simply is not a big market for such an aircraft.


So how could Airbus make such a strategic error? The answer is that it is, as the man said, a classic Euro-scheme. No ordinary company, responsible to ordinary shareholders, would hazard its capital on such a risky project as the A380. But this is no ordinary company. According to the US trade representative, Susan Schwab, Airbus has been subsidised to the tune of $40 billion of ‘launch aid’ since it was formed in 1967. Two years ago, the US complained to the World Trade Organisation about state loans to Airbus. Airbus counter-claimed, saying Boeing was effectively subsidised by military and Nasa contracts and grants from its home state, Washington. That row is still bubbling away.

The A380 was the sort of project Labour could not resist. More than 10,000 people work in Airbus factories making wings at Broughton in North Wales and Filton near Bristol. And a small grant from the Welsh Assembly last year triggered a second complaint from the Americans to the WTO.

But Airbus desperately needs more ‘launch aid’ to save the company and to take on the Boeing Dreamliner with a modernised version of the A350 that was being puffed at Farnborough. It is also working on the A400M, a huge transport aircraft for those European air forces that don’t like American planes. Airbus faces development costs of billions (it could sink as much as £6 billion into the A350) and will be hard pressed to raise the funds in the capital markets, given the A380 fiasco. This means it must again go cap in hand to the treasuries of Berlin, Paris, London and even Madrid.

What do the Americans think of that? A spokesman for the US trade representative’s office says, ‘The USA has made it clear for over two years now that launch aid is unacceptable. We will litigate our case with the WTO if necessary.’ Without launch aid, Airbus will be crushed by Boeing; with launch aid, Airbus faces a shock-and-awe offensive by the Americans at the WTO. What a fine Euro-mess indeed!

[LOKE]

"So the 747 essentially is a 1960s design meeting 1960s safety standards."

I think you would be hard pressed to find many individual Regulations within FAR 25 with an Amended Date in the '60's. Case in point - the 737 NG - though a Derivative Certified under FAR 25 - still ended up with WET Certified Takeoff Performance Numbers.

It's a bit of a stretch to say that because some parts of FAR 25 originated in the '60's - even though it has continuously changed - any airplane Certified by it is a 60's vintage A/C. It's an evolving document.

BTW - I don't intend to imply that FAR 25 is a perfect document.

Regards,

LK

[mfaff]

Tail dragger...

Just to add insult to injury your choice of 911 was particularly poor...as from its introduction in 1965 until the last of the air cooled cars in 1997 they were essentailly the same car... the tub being pretty much interchangeable.. as were to the roof panels and other items...after that the water cooled 996 model was a totally new car....and sadly does not look like a 911 at all.... ;)

(the 956 was a Group C racer as well.. I know you meant the 356)

[Loose rivets]

Trefgarne. That's a familiar name. Anything known about the author?

[Capt Groper]

Real reason - Airports not ready for this A/C?
Wouldn't be in the interests of the Manufactor and Airlines to have a few more than 4 airports available for operational service of this A/C. Surely this is the real reason for the delays.

[lomapaseo]

Real reason - Airports not ready for this A/C?
Wouldn't be in the interests of the Manufactor and Airlines to have a few more than 4 airports available for operational service of this A/C. Surely this is the real reason for the delays.

I don't understand your point. It's up to the airlines to identify the need and benefits to the airport. I assume that the number of airports expecting to support the A380 commercially (having nothing to do with diversions) will do so based on expected route traffic


To me it's not a case of having the airport lined up first. It's a case of the airlines identifying the proposed route and then negotiating with the airport. I would also ignore any utterance of a single US congressman as they don't always reflect the will of the people who fly.

[PAXboy]

harpic this is typical of any large project. So how could Airbus make such a strategic error? The answer is that it is, as the man said, a classic Euro-scheme. No ordinary company, responsible to ordinary shareholders, would hazard its capital on such a risky project as the A380.It seems as if the author has not read about ther 747? Boeing 'bet the farm' and very nearly lost. They had PanAm with them and they won trhough. I expect that the A380 will do likewise. The differance is that, 40 years on, the costs, regulatory issues, technology, stakes and publcity are 100% higher. I pick the figure as a mere example, it could well be 1,000% higher.

Forty years ago, business reporting was not so public but, due in part to the expansion of share ownership, many more people are interested. Also, business, governments and national prosperity have become very much more closely linked. The news media now report business matters in a totally different way. For example, the the main TV/radio news bulletins carry the daily close of the UK and US stock markets, as well as currency variations. There are other factors too, of course, such as the EU itself but Boeing did not have anything like the same level of public scrutiny.

I would imagine that from first test flight to being sure that the 747 was a success must have been ten years or more? Fortunately for people selling articles to magazines (be they right wing like The Spectator or any other) most folks are interested in the short term only. By the way, this is not an aplogy of the stupid and selfish behaviour of the senior mgmt of EADS and Airbus.

Let us not forget that Boeing said that there was no market for a machine of the A380 size. Now the 748i is going to be larger than anything they have done before. Catch up time?

[jetjackel]

This thread is really humerous.

Boeing didn't build an SST in the 70's because they knew the aircraft would have to be subsidized, just like the Concord was.

Status is expensive.

Stretching the 747 is just "meeting the market". Good business. Let AirBus spend the development money to "dazzel the masses" with, what appears to be at this point, the White Elephant, but I'm sure more EU tax subsidies can fix it.

The A-380 is just another 60's technology aircraft.

If it burns kerosene, its a 60's technology aircraft.

Put all the wires and computers in it you want, but it "ain't no different" than any other widebody, just bigger.

Maybe they should market the A-380 as a "kit aircraft" and save the overtaxed EU members money and grief.

More seats and bigger engines doesn't make it any different than any other current aircraft on the market.

Todays papers are, again, spouting the A-350 as having Singapore Airlines placing orders. Wonder how many AirBus had to give away to get that headline.

AirBus is so political that its laughable. Anytime politics run businesses you end up having Alitalia's and Aeroflots.

Boeing has been "doing this" a long time gentlemen. They seem the only ones who aren't hysterical.

Boeing just plugs along, selling airplanes and making profits, without burdening the hard working citizens.

[airsupremacy]

yea yea, the A380 is what? most of these allegations are unfounded, the a380 will operate anywhere the B747 can, it's just rumours, oh sorry we are on the rumour network!:oh:

[GrazingIncidence]

Boeing's being quiet for several reasons, I'm sure. But one of them must be that they're concerned that the 'build sequence' issues that A380 is suffering from will happen to the 787.
Boeing's strategy of pushing the subassembly build back up the supplier foodchain (so that they can put the big bits together in a few days once they get to Everett) was and is ambitious - perhaps even more so than the similar arrangements that Airbus have for the 380. While I was attending build planning meetings at Boeing over a year ago there was a steady drift of work sliding from the supplier locations down the build sequence line toward final assembly in Washington. Effort was being applied to having this drift 'caught' at the intermediate build locations before shipping to Everett.
But this work will continue to slide downhill - and there will be a great deal of out-of-sequence work done on the first 50+ 787's. This was being planned for, in the same way that Airbus planned for it. Airbus didn't get it right - and Boeing may not either.

[KATLPAX]

AND now fuselage problems....(from Yahoo news)

BERLIN (AFP) - New problems have been detected on Airbus's giant A380 super jumbo jet, adding to the woes of the fledging aircraft which is already afflicted with wiring problems.

Problems with section 19 of the fuselage were detected during trial flights in Toulouse, southern France, according to an internal Airbus document, the weekly Der Spiegel reported in its edition which goes on sale Monday.

No details were given on the nature of the problem.

The European aircraft manufacturer decided in early March to reinforce section 19, the aft cone of the fuselage, Der Spiegel reported.

Deliveries of the A380, the biggest commercial aircraft in the world, have been severely delayed.

The European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS), which owns 80 percent of Airbus announced in June that deliveries would be delayed by six to seven months because of a production problem involving wiring connections.

Only nine of the aircraft would be delivered in 2007, seriously affecting the EADS's financial results.

The double-decker plane is designed to carry 555 to 840 passengers, about 35 percent more than the Boeing B747. To date, 16 airline companies have ordered 168 of the super jumbo jets.

[parabellum]

I'm still quite surprised by the level of optimism shown by A380 supporters, who are noticeably fewer these days!.

All the following was here, on PPRuNe, over a year ago so it not in anyway influenced by recent events.

Airbus thought they would produce and market a B747 replacement, with a similar market to the B747. Boeing had serious doubts about the commercial viability of an Extra Large Aircraft (ELA) and offered Airbus a Boeing/Airbus consortium which Airbus declined and said they would continue with the A380 on their own. Shortly after that decision Boeing cancelled their plans for an A380 competitor.

Airbus did not accept that the B747 replacement was already defined in the shape of the B777 and to a lesser extent the A330, despite airlines like BA and SIA ordering the B777 in large numbers and reducing their B747-400 fleet by equally large numbers.

The A380 has only a niche market. The airlines will, of course, welcome the arrival of the aircraft, provided in remains fully supported. They have specific routes they want to use it on, the UK-Australia route for one, but they will never order it in the same quantities as they did the B747-400, BA and SIA won't have fleets as large as their previous B747-400 fleets at their peak, they and others like them only require the A380 in relatively small numbers.

Originally Airbus said they needed 269 sales, I believe, to break even but since that figure was announced they have had major budget overrun and major penalty payments to customers to cost in, not to mention the discounts they will have offered launch customers just to get the order book going. How many orders to date? After Farnborough still less than 200 and they are mired in technical difficulties still. It is highly unlikely they will ever reach their original break even number of aircraft let alone what the revised number must now be, closer to 500 aircraft I would suspect. Boeing, on the other hand, will still be able to produce a relatively small number of B747-800 to fill the 500 seat long haul requirement and still make a profit as so much of the aircraft is already tried, tested and above all has passenger appeal.

Technically the A380 may be ahead of the market in many respects but it is leading Airbus Industries into very serious financial trouble and commercially the A380 is a dead duck.

[Arnie Dan Otherdump]

The B52 bomber had body gear steering long before the B747, not sure about the B47 though. It was used to ensure gear aligned with the runway centreline in cross wind landings - top secret at the time too.

[TopBunk]

...... despite airlines like BA and SIA ordering the B777 in large numbers and reducing their B747-400 fleet by equally large numbers.

Whilst you may be corrrect in your thoughts, you come over as being the source of all knowledge and adopt a parent-child attitude, then get a basic fact wrong!

BA have not reduced their B747-400 fleet numbers at all, I can't speak for SIA.

[parabellum]

Sorry Top Bunk you are quite right, I got a basic fact wrong, BA still operating somewhere in the region of 57 aircraft?
Nevertheless, many B747-400 operators have reduced their fleet size in favour of the big twins.

Nothing 'parental' about my post at all, just reiterating points made here on PPRuNe many times before and well over a year ago.

Now, remind me, how many A380 have BA got on order?;)

[His dudeness]

I´m definetely NOT an Airbus "supporter", but if my memory serves correct, the 747 had a lot of teething problems as well. Anyone remembers the phrase 747-Glider ?
And the 47 was discribed as the biggest business gamble ever (well, before the 380). At least is was it for for Boeing and PanAm. Boeing won, PanAm didn´t.
Which would explain why a lot of airlines are reluctant to buy now.

But maybe I go it all wrong...

[xetroV]

AND now fuselage problems....(from Yahoo news)
Old news, as they even acknowledge themselves:
The European aircraft manufacturer decided in early March to reinforce section 19, the aft cone of the fuselage, Der Spiegel reported.
That's been fixed long ago. You really shouldn't believe everything that's printed in the papers.

[KATLPAX]

As pointed out, don't belive everything you read in the papers...again from Yahoo today...ok to believe this? ;)

PARIS (AFP) - Airbus said that a fault discovered in the fuselage of its A380 super jumbo in the spring has been long since resolved, saying it was "astonished" at how the issue was "blown up" in a German magazine article.

The fault is an "old issue which has been fixed", with the company carrying out "reinforcements on the structure, and there is absolutely nothing abnormal about that," a spokeswoman for the European aerospace group said.

In a pre-release of an article to be published on Monday, German weekly Der Spiegel cited internal company documents outlining problems with "section 19" of the fuselage that were detected during trial flights in March in Toulouse, southern France.

During the development of an aircraft, "there are test flights, data checks, during which things are discovered. That's what the tests are for," the Airbus spokeswoman said.

Investors and Airbus customers are highly sensitive about faults with the flagship project after June's shock announcement of wiring problems and resulting major delays in the delivery of the plane to airlines.

The news prompted a slump in the share price of parent company European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) and the resignation of the head of Airbus and the co-chief executive of EADS.

The double-decker will be the world's biggest ever commercial airliner with space for between 555 to 840 passengers, about 35 percent more than Boeing's 747 jumbo.

The project received a much-needed vote of confidence earlier this week with Singapore Airlines ordering nine more aircraft after Airbus unveiled revamped design plans at the Farnborough International Airshow in southern England.

[xetroV]

As pointed out, don't belive everything you read in the papers...again from Yahoo today...ok to believe this? ;)
Haha! Yeah, well... maybe. ;) Hope I didn't come across as shooting the messenger (i.e. you), because I really wasn't. Well, not intentionally, anyway.

It's just that Der Spiegel is not what I would call a reliable source when it comes to aviation. Their aviation editor seems to have some kind of beef with anything that even remotely smells 'French', or even 'European'. Now, while I can quite understand that sentiment, I still find it annyoing to see this getting in the way of the facts. Presenting findings from March this year as "new troubles for the A380" is not what consider objective, unbiased reporting.

[The Jolly Roger]

IT FLIES!!!! It really does.....saw it yesterday at Farnborough!!!!!!!! :}

[mini]

A personal opinion,

Indeed it does fly, I'm sure its optimal flight economics also stack up, I'm just not sure the requisite volume of sales will be achieved.

The logistics chain is a politically dictated risk managment nightmare, stories from the techies at the coalface are not encouraging re the manufacturing design aspects - probably standard stuff with a new build?

I wouldn't put money on it right now. :sad:

[Ignition Override]

On page 3, a debate began about the 747's certification.
One thing is understood much better by structural engineers: long-term stresses inside a metal vertical stabilizer and rudder, compared to plastic etc (Airbus, Boeing Dreamliner).

Strange anomlies (here) with the A-300's rudder movements. And yes, there were tragedies with two B-737s. And the Silk Air B-737 tragedy might not have been an accident.

When large pieces break away, the investigation committees do not always have a pilot whom they can blame.
For example, we read nothing in our press about the former East German investigation about the Interflug A-300 or 310, or was this after the Wall came down?

We also read little or nothing about the French aviation incident/accident investigations or conclusions regarding anomalies with the Air France A-300.

[Volume]

IT FLIES!!!! It really does.....saw it yesterday at Farnborough!!!!!!!!

Like the Bristol Brabazon some decades ago ? :ouch:

[angelorange]

Brabazon - those were the days! When whole villages had to be demolished to make room for wide enough runways!

So how many Brabazons were ordered around the globe then?!

The A380 will come of age - give it at least 10 years - I mean the 747 wasn't an instant 1000 order success!

Patience is a virtue......


..... but she won't always wait!

[Will Hung]

An awesome a/c. One we should all take pride in. After seeing her yesterday I have no doubt that she will be a long-term success story. The 600 is pretty tasty too ! Well done Airbus.

[outofsynch]

It will work... in time... just like the 747 did years ago.

Many, many airlines will be waiting until the first deliveries, to decide when/how many to order. BA included I'll bet.

No major airline will want to be out of this race long, once they enter service.

[Nardi Riviera]

Forgive me for technical ignorance, but how can the wiring on 380 be worse off than the pathetic CAPTON “insulation” on the still-flying X-versions of 747? Also - by the time that the 747 was on, the general public were not as inpatient as today.

After all, the 747 flew maaany years before the Capton failure was disclosed by unfortunate multiple-factor accidents. The 380 may fly even longer before something icky turns up. Then why the demand that anything produced nowadays should be infallible?

If Airbus wouldn’t go for it, then Boeing would be free to give us whatever they wanted. It’s called “competition” or “free enterprise”, or whatever you choose.

Can’t recall that the 747 (which was way ahead it’s time) encountered such a barrage. When somebody goes where no man has ventured before, pls give them some leeway!

When the 747 came about, there was an issue about i.e. airport gates. In “no time”, airports adapted to the public demand for bigger aircraft, and the rest is history.

After all, Airbus was the first to implement computer-controlled a/c. Their first tries were not to brag about, but so has been a fact all during the evolution of flight.

Like anything we buy these days, things are not expected to last very long (low-cost = low quality). Throw-away-items goes, whether it relates to things or service.

I dig Boeing, but still marvel re the cooperation that the Airbus venture have managed in an previously divided Europe (hey, only 90 yrs ago those small countries actually were at war!)

Wouldn’t mind if somebody here would sum up the core of these discussions… :hmm:

[parabellum]

I'll leave the summing up to someone else but for me the bottom line is this:

There is no doubt that when it's problems are sorted the A380 will be technically way ahead until the others catch up. The problem is that the A380 was intended as a B747 replacement with a similar size of market and that is not going to happen. The future of the A380 lies with the airlines and they only require this aircraft for a niche market that is not big enough to generate sufficient orders to enable the project to break even.
Technically excellent, (even though it looks wrong!), commercially a dinosaur.

My 2cents worth.

[Packsonflight]

I saw in FI that the 787 program is 2-3% overweight

[rhovsquared]

Especially, since Boeing can just keep lengthening The Queen's upper and lower decks, the're very good at that ;)

Nothing will match the Grace, Beauty and Flying qualities of the 747 series of jets in the "Jumbo/Super-Jumbo" arena :D :D :D And they'll keep [even If they decide on a side stick] ARTIFICIAL FEEL :E

edired to add the author of this post maybe a bit biased on this issue

[aviate1138]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/0102050713900.jpg
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/0102050714400.jpg
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/0102050713900.jpg
If the A380 is so unwieldy, heavy, late etc., how come poor little EGLF - Farnborough and its tiny runway coped with the 'lumbering' A380 [OK it wasn't at gross] for over a week of trundling about.
After days of serious heat, nothing appeared to have been scraped or dug up, or have I missed some gossip? Once SIA start pulling in the self loaders, the rest will follow on IMHO. Had the A380 been a Boeing product, BA would have been up at the head of the queue. :)
Aviate1138

[lardcake]

Lets not forget how long the 747 has been flying in all it's variants. You can expect the A380 to be operational for at least as long and production in place the whole, or most of, the time.

Just because it hasn't enough orders to break even currently doesn't mean that the elusive break-even line will not be crossed ;)

Also, the sheer scale of production and the aircraft itself have left the public in awe - is this not what helped fuel initial 747 sales - the public wanting to fly on something that 'shouldn't fly'.

I'd bet money on Airbus being able to meet the break-even line, given time. It's been a huge project and been vastly expensive, so one cannot possibly expect it to have broken even before it's first commercial flight, but it'll get there.

That being said, it is a beast of an a/c! The 747 is much prettier, but I think for aesthetics the 346 is at the top - in commercial aviation at least.

[ARINC]

Couple of points..

1. Unfortunately the A380 uses Capton insulation aswell, albeit with a secondary cable sheathing underneath. Still makes me shudder to think when I recall the fire damage that arcing Capton can create.


2. The A380 seems to taxi ok to me..got through this lot alright..seriously the taxi issues are completely bogus.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b112/Baw1085/IMG_0265red.jpg


3. Yes it is primarily the cabling thats causing the delays....:{

[Ignition Override]

The (former) West German taxpayers are all paying a hefty extra chunk of money for the restructuring in eastern Germany.

How many more Euros, on average, will come out of their Taschen/pockets to help finance unforecast losses on the A-380 production and sales?:hmm:

How much more from the French taxpayers?:hmm:

[ORAC]

Who cares.... :E

[PAXboy]

The loans to EADS will have to be repaid and the citizens of Europe may well consider that the loan is worth it. The company provides work for many and holds technical knowledge in the continent, rather than people going to work for the Americans ;) . Manufacturing of major capital items is vital to any nation, as the USA plainly recognises when it tries to ensure that major military contracts are placed with US companies.

Please remember,firstly, that every nation on the planet has always been 100% biased in it's own favour!!! And, secondly, that whilst many large countries clamour for 'open markets' the end results are not always balanced.

[L337]

Had the A380 been a Boeing product, BA would have been up at the head of the queue.

More anti BA prejudice. BA has a vast fleet of Airbuses.

I was in the room when Rod Eddington was asked. "Are we going to buy the A380". His answer was that BA were not going to be test pilots for a brand new product. He went on to comment that during his time at Cathay the introduction of another brand new product had been fraught with immense problems. And that he had no desire to revisit that experience. He finished by saying that if the Customer liked the A380, then BA would buy them.

L337

[ZAGORFLY]

I noticed that one Hydraulic system is gone.
From the typical 3 GBY the Blue is missing. Is this the result of a saving weight? how about redundancy?

[aviate1138]

More anti BA prejudice. BA has a vast fleet of Airbuses.
I was in the room when Rod Eddington was asked. "Are we going to buy the A380". He finished by saying that if the Customer liked the A380, then BA would buy them.
L337
How very innovative of him as BA's boss. He waits till another airline produces good customer response to the A380, THEN he puts in an order!

Aviate 1138
PS As for BA's vast fleet of Airbus machines, when Caledonian was incorporated and BA took on their Airbus fleet they didn't exactly give the flight crews much hope. A pal who flew A 320's said he didn't expect to last on them for long as BA Engineering mainly liked Boeing machines as did the top brass.
Not anti BA [mangement mainly] at all but they chop and change like the wind these days.

[M.Mouse]

How very innovative of him as BA's boss.

Or doublespeak for saying that he was not convinced of the economics of the ugly thing in the first place.

[barryt]

And when BA does finally put in an order, they'll be at the back of the line of customers....:)

[PAXboy]

barryt Would you rather BA was a bit behind in getting a fancy new a/c - or a long way behind by introducing a machine that takes time, care, attention and money to get right? However smooth the introduction is, the time, effort and £££ for a carrier to be the launch customer is truly massive. There will be delays and cancellations that affect the whole of the fleet and many, many pax. In the long run - that can be highly damaging.

Small and new companies need the publicity of being launch customer and will take the 'hit' of the downside to be the test bed for the manufacturer. OTOH big companies do not want that and will avoid the risk. As I recall, VS stated after being launch for the A340-600, Never Again.

[barryt]

PAXBoy I can understand and appreciate BA's risk management strategy with regard to acquiring the A380, and it makes sense, but there is also a fine balancing act that will be required, because (as I believe), there will come a time when they will need to act, and when (not if, I believe) they do, it will yet still be a trade-off between "problems" and maintaining the economics of their own business - and they will go to the back of the queue when they put in an order, like anyone else (unless they perform special "tricks" ... ;). If they leave it too long, it will begin costing them dearly, since I believe the uptake on orders for the A380 will only increase, and begin to snowball over the next 2 or 3 years. One argument has always been that there isn't really a market to accomodate enough of them in the air. And it's a valid one. Except it assumes the kinds of pax will remain the same. And the fares will remain roughly the same. I believe a new "thing" is starting, and it's rather subtle. I believe more and more people are going to begin flying (people who perhaps previously couldn't afford to), and the era of "low cost international carriers" is upon us. I really believe there is a subtle change taking place in "pax profile", for want of a better word. And it's going to support the A380. And I believe it will ultimately make the continuing operations of the 747 uneconomical by comparison. Singapore Airlines etc have been quick on the uptake, and in my opinion, very shrewd indeed. They are going to make a "killing" in the future I think....Although all this will take a good few years I though probably, who knows HOW many years, but the whole scenario could be on us a lot quicker than we think, and BA could easily be caught with their "pants down" as it were, so whether they like it or not, it makes good business sense to maintain some kind of tangible hold on putting orders in for the A380....Richard Branson knows what he's doing... ;) But then again, he's always been light-years ahead of BA.... ;)

[Globaliser]

One argument has always been that there isn't really a market to accomodate enough of them in the air. And it's a valid one. Except it assumes the kinds of pax will remain the same. And the fares will remain roughly the same. I believe a new "thing" is starting, and it's rather subtle. I believe more and more people are going to begin flying (people who perhaps previously couldn't afford to), and the era of "low cost international carriers" is upon us. I really believe there is a subtle change taking place in "pax profile", for want of a better word.Even so, remember that BA's strengths are not in cultivating the low-fare low-yield passenger. There will always be a place for that part of the market in BA's aircraft, and BA has in the past suffered from positively ignoring and despising it. But BA's strengths abide in the cabins for which big bucks are paid. Even though BA needs some low-fare pax, getting A380s now will force BA to positively chase the low-fare market: That, I think, would be financially disastrous for the airline.

[20driver]

Globaliser has it right. The A380 only save money when it is full. Chasing empty seats with below cost fares is all of the airlines biggest single problem. Personally I think the premium traffic will avoid the A380. You cannot buy time and people with first class money don't want to waste it while they load the plane.

[swedish]

I spend most of my life flying longhaul and normally in buisness class, along with a large number of my collegues. To be fair I don't care what a/c I'm on.
My order of requiurements are:
1. Flight times / routing (I want the last leg home to be the long one)
2. Service
3. Anything else

If you take me and my collegues as the type of passenger airlines want (fairly high yield).

1. The last leg home will not be supported by the A380 as I live at an airport which does not have any airlines who have bought the A380 and even if they did it wouldn't support these routes. The last think I want is to sit at FRA for 4 hours after a longhaul flight for only a 2hr flight home.

2. BA service rocks! By far the best buisness class. So even if I can choose which aircraft type I'll be flying on BA no matter what it is.

[theresalwaysone]

I heard a little rumour that one airline has pulled out of firm orders because of high fuel consumption concerns on this a/c

[glhcarl]

Nardi Rivera & ARNIC: regarding your posts numbers 70 & 76. The name of the wire is KAPTON.

[Mudfoot]

I heard a little rumour that one airline has pulled out of firm orders because of high fuel consumption concerns on this a/c

Keep in mind, sir: rumours are not fact. Take it from an insider - no cancelled orders. None on the horizon, none in hiding. Patience is a virtue, saith the airlines... ref Singapore's recent comments.

Cheers, y'all.

[Flight Detent]

Hi Mudfoot,

Patience will certainly NEED to be a virtue flying anywhere near any A380.

The time needed to check in, assemble at the gate(s), load all the pax, and then fly to the hub nearest your destination in the slowest airplanes in the skies, not even counting the fact that it might be behind another one, and thereby causing a doubling of the traffic departure, enroute and approach interval, and thats assuming the prior A380 doesn't have to taxi back via the parallel taxiway, which will cause another delay to your landing.

Forget it, "IF it ain't......"

Cheers, FD :ugh:

[No Mate!]

I hope to fly the A380n as im in a current line check!!

[the_hawk]

the slowest airplanes in the skies

the A380? not from the numbers, so what do you mean?

[aviate1138]

Hi Mudfoot,
Patience will certainly NEED to be a virtue flying anywhere near any A380.
The time needed to check in, assemble at the gate(s), load all the pax, etc......Cheers, FD :ugh:



Shirley,
Two decks with separate boarding facilities will load in the same time as one deck????? Like having two 747's alongside boarding at the same time.
Aviate 1138

[Taildragger67]

Richard Branson knows what he's doing... ;) But then again, he's always been light-years ahead of BA.... ;)

Except when crossing the Pond before October '03!

Actually BA had 744s some years before VS. They were going to nearly every port VS flies to, years before VS. They had flat beds... years before VS.

Not wanting to get into a slanging match, but yer got yer facts wrong.

Maybe BA have other (commercial) things on their minds to think about (like getting their pension deficit sorted, like numerous other FTSE-100 companies)before stumping up major capex money for new airframes when they've got a pretty good mix for their route structure as it is. There are less than ten routes BA flies, which might support the 380 - and importantly, the infrastructure associated with it. BA has previously said that if it could trade their 744s for 777s it'd jump at it - so clearly jumping into the point-to-point camp (hence possibly a more willing 787 or 350 customer).

Not actually that bad a commercial strategy to let someone else suffer whilst the early bugs are ironed out. If BA came onto the 380 order book, you can bet that Leahy would find a way to squeeze them in (eg. give FedEx a bit of an incentive to delay a few of their F-models). And then there are the airframes ordered by leasing companies (eg. ILFC) - have these been fully allocated yet? No? There ya go.

[MarkD]

Talking about equipment is a bit pointless unless you consider whether any change in strategy is coming under Walsh.

(1) If Fortress Heathrow is the plan, just as it is now, then 380s might work as eventually they will be filled - 748 is not a huge growth over 744 if you're intending to buy with a window of 20 years of service into airports like JFK which have limited capacity for additional movements. Eventually you probably look at more 321s to replace the shuttle 757s and displace LHR 319/320 for more pax/slot.

(2) If the plan to accommodate growth included expanding LGW/MAN/BHX/GLA service then 773s and 787s (to replace the 767/772 market size and provide T/A out of the regions) and a smaller number of 748s to retain commonality and offer a smaller growth size ex LHR would be appropriate.

There doesn't seem to be much chance of (2) so...

[PAXboy]

Not aiming to get into a heavy debate barryt but I think that the Y pax have made it clear that they only want the lowest fare and the highest pax requirements are well set out by swedish (above). The actual machine will make no difference and I doubt if more than 5% of pax know what machine they are on.

When the 747 first came out, it did lower seat costs and it did attract people. Then the 767 did the same for the thinner routes but pax began to realise that seat size and the number of toilets was being scaled back. Long haul travel is remarkably cheap now for many Y pax and the a/c are pretty full. It's one thing to regularly fill 7 x 747 for one route in one week but fill 7 x 380? I have no doubt that Singapore will do well with the machine but that is because most of their routes are long (very long) and some have two rotations per day. Therefore, they will be making savings very quickly. For a carrier to take a route with a 74n and expand it to a 380 will take some nerve and a lot of cash.

[Mudfoot]

Shirley,
Two decks with separate boarding facilities will load in the same time as one deck????? Like having two 747's alongside boarding at the same time.
Aviate 1138

A1138, you caught on quick - that's exactly what is intended. Good call!

Cheers, y'all.

[seacue]

I've been a pax on a 747 that loaded through two doors at the same time ... one door was for pax on the port aisle, the other for the starboard.

[Mudfoot]

...and a great battle ensued for those who sat in the middle. lol

[Volume]

I noticed that one Hydraulic system is gone.
From the typical 3 GBY the Blue is missing. Is this the result of a saving weight? how about redundancy?

yep, It´s for weight saving. Additionally the hydraulic pressure has been increased (like on the Concorde or on military aircraft) to reduce fluid volume and pipe diameter.
Additional electrically powered actuators are installed (two types, fully contained electrohydraulic ones, that just need electricity and a type that neds low pressure hydraulic fluid and electric power, so if all hydraulic pumps fail, these are still working, but if the hydraulic fluid is lost, they stop working)
Compared with the A340, the number of rudders and elevators is doubled, the number of ailerons is trippled. The total number of actuators is much higher. There are two hydraulic and two electric systems, so 4 flight control powering systems in total (same number as on the 747 and the L1011, more than on the DC-10/MD-11, 737, 757, 767...) So the overall redundancy should be higher while still saving weight.

[Rollingthunder]

It's too early to call this yet.
Airbus will catch up although wire bundles a metre short and some lack of wiring paths are worrying. And it doesn't look quite right.
The thing is point to point or hub to hub. That is the question.
The proof will be in the pudding.
I imagine there will be room for both.

[BusyB]

Or doublespeak for saying that he was not convinced of the economics of the ugly thing in the first place.

More likely he doesn't want to be the introductory airline for another Airbus after his CX experience introducing the 330's.;)

[ZAGORFLY]

In a recent cockpit layout picture of the A 380 I have noticed few new things.
For instance two instead of three hydraulic systems.

Is this another way to loose some weight or simply a following trend? Boeing 787 is without bleed air system completely relying on electric even for pressurization. V.S.S. (very simple and smart) but it could be "Very Simply Stupid if you loose your hydraulic redundancy. Concorde started with Green.Yellow and Blue many years ago.


Any comment guys?

[PAXboy]

Although I only dip into matters concerning this a/c, I know that this question has been asked and answered several times in the past year. On closer inspection of the thread, this question was asked/answered on 3rd August. the post number is #104. So please use the Search function.

[VectorLine]

Does anyone have a copy of the flight plan of the A380 F-WXXL that flew up towards the north pole on Saturday 26 August and back south through Scottish and London FIRs?

If so could you post it here or send via PM?

Cheers

VL

[vapilot2004]

Airbus aborts test flight of superjumbo
Reuters


London: Airbus aborted a test flight of the A380 superjumbo from France to Tunisia yesterday after a sensor indicated a possible problem with the doors enclosing the main landing gear, the planemaker said.

"The sensor sensed a mismatch in the position of the main landing gear doors," a spokeswoman said. "It happened shortly after take-off."

The plane flew back to Toulouse and landed without incident, she said.

A spokeswoman for landing gear supplier Goodrich said the incident did not involve the landing gear itself. Airbus has five of the $300-million planes in flight testing. They have made more than 580 flights and logged over 1,800 hours in the air.

Parent company EADS revealed in June that complications in wiring the mammoth planes were expected to delay deliveries scheduled for the next three years.

The news shook EADS shares and triggered a management shake-up. The first A380 is still scheduled for delivery to Singapore Airlines late this year.




This is all the AP got:

PARIS - An Airbus A380 superjumbo test flight heading from France to the North African desert was cut short today as a precaution, the plane manufacturer said.

The jet was scheduled to fly to the airport of Tozeur-Nefta in southern Tunisia, but the pilot returned to the plane's base in Toulouse, France, soon after takeoff because of a "minor incident," said Airbus spokeswoman Anne Galabert. She declined to elaborate.

Galabert said the shortened flight was a "non-event" that received attention only because journalists waiting in Tunisia were disappointed when they learned they would not see the world's largest passenger plane.

The decision to turn back was "something that is completely normal in the testing phase," she said, adding that the flight will be rescheduled for a later date.

Five A380s have clocked more than 1,800 hours of test flights, she said.

The A380 program has been under close scrutiny since delays in the long-awaited superjumbo sent stock in parent company European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co. tumbling more than 25 percent in June. They also led to a major management reshuffle at the Franco-German company, and customer and investor confidence was rattled.



Goodrich covering their erm, gear, I see.

Airbus is not commenting on this officially. :confused:

[panda-k-bear]

Well there was me pootling along the road to the Airbus Delivery Centre for a meeting with some of the bods there and low and behold, 4 A380s in formation flew right over my head - one at the front and 3 in a V-formation behind it! That was at about 11 o'clock local. A photo flight, no doubt. Still, a VERY impressive sight!

[taffman]

Yes, saw same from edge of runway, incredible. Shame no smoke and rolls though. Still think the Red Arrows have the edge. :ok:

Will be a while me thinks before that is seen again.

[Mudfoot]

Airbus is not commenting on this officially. :confused:

Precautionary A380 turnback delays Tunisia testing
ATI: 290806

Airbus has postponed additional hot-weather tests on one of its A380 aircraft after an undercarriage sensor indication prompted the crew to abandon a flight to Tunisia.

The aircraft, serial number MSN004, returned to Toulouse today around 25min after departure.

It had been heading for the city of Tozeur to perform hot-weather testing. But shortly after take-off the crew received a sensor indication which prevented the main landing gear from retracting.

“Sensors detected a mismatch of information on the [landing gear] doors,” a, spokeswoman from Airbus says, adding that the data meant that the system could not determine whether the doors were open or closed.

“There was no problem with the landing gear itself,” she adds. The indication automatically led the A380’s systems to block retraction of the landing gear and the crew opted to return to Toulouse, where the aircraft landed without incident.

Aircraft MSN004 was the jet which carried out ‘hot and high’ altitude performance testing in Colombia at the beginning of the year. More tests had been due to take place in Tozeur but the spokeswoman says: “These additional tests will be delayed to another day.”

It's now official...

Cheers, y'all.

[fly_high]

The photos of today's flypast at Toulouse (the 4 test aircraft A380 MSN 001, MSN 002, MSN 004 and MSN 009) were something else, very impressive.

What will happen to these 4 aircraft once the testing and certification is complete? Will one/two/all of the aircraft become the first passenger-carrying A380s sold or will they be retained as further test/museum items?

Presumably some of them will have flown so many hours in all sorts of conditions that they will have some wear and tear before too long?

[fly_high]

The photos of today's flypast at Toulouse (the 4 test aircraft A380 MSN 001, MSN 002, MSN 004 and MSN 009) were something else, very impressive.

What will happen to these 4 aircraft once the testing and certification is complete? Will one/two/all of the aircraft become the first passenger-carrying A380s sold or will they be retained as further test/museum items?

Presumably some of them will have flown so many hours in all sorts of conditions that they will have some wear and tear before too long?

According to an e-mail I received from Airbus this morning:

Details on the further utilisation of the developmental aircraft will be announced at a later date.

Anybody here have any thoughts on this?

[737oli]

Hello,
Does anybody know what's the foreseen flight plan for the first passenger flight? Hope to see it in flight or at least hear it on radio.

Happy landing,

Oli

[rotornut]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5312020.stm?ls

[masalaairlines]

7 hours. Where could they be going to? Hopefully not a 'flight to nowhere'.

[Flip Flop Flyer]

Flight XL(!)001 TLS-TLS. Innovative routing, wonder if it'll catch on ;)

[CDG1]

Airbus’s experimental test pilot Frank Chapman is captaining the first ELF test with chief test pilot Jacques Rosay and chief instructor pilot Jacques Drappier alongside him.

The four ELF tests, which are round-trips from Toulouse, will take place this week and last 7h, 10h, 12h and 15h respectively. The flights will be operated as a standard airline service. One of the trips will be night flight, to cover all types of flight conditions. The shorter flights will route through France, Spain, the UK and Germany. The longer flights will be flown as far as to Norway in the north and to the Canary Islands in the south.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/09/04/Navigation/177/208796/Pictures+Airbus+A380+takes+off+for+first+Early+Long+Flight+f rom+Toulouse+with+474+passengers+on.html

[WHBM]

Did they do trips like this, including the test night flight, when getting the A340-600 into service ?

I only ask because that introduced a new type of vacuum-assisted toilet which, when flushed, woke up about the 10 seating rows either side of the toilets with it's huge sucking noise. I was surprised that Airbus never discovered this until the aircraft was in service.

I believe a mod has been developed.

[Wino]

Title says it all. 380 continues to slip further, more heads have rolled....
Is anyone suprised?


http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=6420

Cheers,
Wino

[Techman]

Gloating is unbecoming

[surely not]

especially as Boeing might have more than a few problems themselves with the 787 and all its new technology.:E

[11Fan]

I seriously doubt that anyone who actually works for Boeing, and is on this site, is gloating.

The shoe could just as easy be on the other foot.

In other words, those who are bashing Airbus on these forums do not necessarily represent the views of Boeing Employees.

Glass houses are a bi7ch.

[Phileas Fogg]

A dinner in Seattle and all they can find to talk about is Airbus, sour grapes or what?

[Evanelpus]

In other words, those who are bashing Airbus on these forums do not necessarily represent the views of Boeing Employees.

Hardly likely, this is Spotters Corner after all!!

[Mudfoot]

A380 Chief Operating Officer Charles Champion is the only major player to have been ousted, according to the press. More that we haven't heard about?

Cheers, y'all.

[11Fan]

Evanelpus,

Not sure what you meant, probably just my misunderstanding. I'm just suggesting that, as a rule, those who actually "live and work" in the glass houses, in my experience (wink wink), don't throw stones.

My point was that those who are bashing Airbus do not work for Boeing is all. In fact, again in my experience, there is an underlying "mutual respect" for each other. After all, competition is a good thing.

For everyone else, both Airbus and Boeing are fair game.

That's it really. If I read more into what you were saying, my apologies.

Take care,

11Fan

Oh yeah, we spot too.

[Evanelpus]

None taken my friend.

[hobie]

Going through SNN today I'm sure I saw a great big white A380 doing touch and goes .... the weather was desperate so I may be wrong? ....:confused:

[DW11]

You were right. They came looking for windy weather to do a few circuits in.

[hobie]

many thanks DW .....

someone kindly passed to me a photo link from todays visit ....

http://cork-spotters.com/photo/displayimage.php?pos=-573 (http://cork-spotters.com/photo/displayimage.php?pos=-573)

[ALLDAYDELI]

F-WWDD was in full Airbus corporate livery when it came into Heathrow. The SNN pics show it with no logos or decals. Wonder why they de-logo'd it.

[nosefirsteverytime]

*cue sounds of wailing and gnashing of teeth from a college in South Dublin*

:{ :{ :{ :{ :{

[hobie]

The SNN pics show it with no logos or decals. Wonder why they de-logo'd it.

Weight reduction programme? ..... :confused:

(I'll get my coat!!!! ) .... :)

[puff m'call]

Ahhh the "Flying Pig" wallowing in dirty water, just where it should be. :E

[blueskiesup]

It's a sad scene for the A380 project. The Hamburg base is closing for 12 months untill september next year. And they're only going to deliver 4 a/c next year.

[hobie]

through the cool clear rain falling over Shannon ..... I must say I was impressed ...... :)

http://homepage.eircom.net/~corkradar/DSCN7809.jpg

[sortedtoo]

is that 45+ deg or am i imagining it?

[ZAGORFLY]

A 380 will be in HK in mid November and fly over the HK Harbour. Anyone have more detailed information?
thanks

[Pushpak]

of which year??

[No Further Requirements]

of which year??
Gold! :ok: :ok: :} :}

[F900EX]

There was one in Shannon, Ireland the other night... Looks like the A380 is set for a life of airshow style display flights. On that basis you may see one in HK.

[twenty eight]

EADS now says it needs to sell 420 A380s to break even, up from a previous estimate of 270 aircraft.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6067540.stm)

[panda-k-bear]

ATI are reporting that QANTAS has firmed up 8 options on the A380 taking their total firm commitment to 20, still 4 options outstanding.

Apparently:

CEO Geoff Dixon in a statement issued today says the carrier “negotiated an attractive ‘package’ to firm up” the additional A380s.
The order “was made after an extensive review of the recent problems at Airbus and the delivery schedule delays of the A380”, he says, adding: “We are convinced that these problems relate to industrialization issues at Airbus and will be remedied, and in no way relate to the technical capacity of the A380.”

[25check]

So rather than paying Qantas recompense for the delivery delays they are giving them a few aircraft really cheap to save face as usual and spinning it as a victory - geez!

It amazes me how Airbus survive financially with their policy of buy two get one free...or at least thats how it seems to me, how else do they get all these massive orders for narrowbodies!

[panda-k-bear]

Perhaps because they aren't bad planes?

[Craigeedee]

What is the difference between the A380-800 and the A380-900?

[smith]

one hundred

[ATC Watcher]

the 800 flies , the 900 is a concept
900 is basically 11m longer than the 800 , good for 960 pax in Y and 14.000 Km range.

[hobie]

or something along these lines maybe ..... :cool:


The new Airbus is currently sold in two models. The A380-800 can carry 555 passengers in a three-class (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travel_class) configuration or up to 853 passengers in a single-class economy configuration. The range for the -800 model is 15,000 kilometres (8,000 nmi).[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A380#_note-a380_specs) The second model, the A380-800F freighter, will carry 150 tonnes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonne) of cargo 10,400 km (5,600 nmi).[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A380#_note-a380f_specs)
Future variants may include an A380-900 stretch seating about 650 passengers, a shortened A380-700 seating about 455 passengers, and an extended range version with the same passenger capacity as the A380-800. The A380's wing is sized for a Maximum Take-Off Weight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_Take-Off_Weight) (MTOW) over 650 metric tonnes in order to accommodate these future versions, albeit with some strengthening required.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A380#_note-norris_wagner_book) The stronger wing (and structure) is used on the A380-800F freighter. This common design approach sacrifices some fuel efficiency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_efficiency) on the A380-800 passenger model, but the sheer size of the aircraft, coupled with the significant advances in technology described below, are still expected to provide lower operating costs per passenger than all currently produced 747 variants.


ps. why didn't you ask the question in the $$$$$$ Forum? .... :p

[chornedsnorkack]

This month, A380 is supposed to engage in route proving. Including a flight between Sydney and Johannesburg over South Pole.

Are any passengers on route proving (They were on early long flights)?

A380 is, of course, a quad and therefore not subject to ETOPS. What is the nominal diversion time from South Pole?

[PaperTiger]

This month, A380 is supposed to engage in route proving. Including a flight between Sydney and Johannesburg over South Pole.The planned itinerary is Toulouse-JNB-SYD-YVR-TLS crossing both poles.

[chornedsnorkack]

The planned itinerary is Toulouse-JNB-SYD-YVR-TLS crossing both poles.
Sure, but there are more diversion ports at high northern latitudes than at high southern ones!

[Gargleblaster]

Just read in an Icelandic newspaper that one of the A380s just showed up at Keflavik (KEF, BIKF).

There's been a severe storm up there (all flights were cancelled this morning, now calmed a little).

So they apparently decided to go there to test crosswind landings. Wind speed is now around 40 kts.

http://www.mbl.is/mm/frettir/frett.html?nid=1234046 (if you happen to understand Icelandic :-)

Metar for BIKF: BIKF 101400Z 26039G52KT 5000 -SHGS FEW020CB SCT031 BKN046 02/M01 Q0974.

[ZeeDoktor]

Those of you who are "locationally challenged" will be able to follow its progress on http://www.openatc.com and http://www.ozradar.com starting in about an hour from now (8:30am Sydney time)

It will leave tomorrow around noon sydney time.

Cheers

[ZeeDoktor]

A380 is now visible on OpenATC.com, just south of Tassie as AIB402 FL410

[mafibacon]

I have just spotted the MSN 015 convoy in the parking bay in Eauze (Gers). It will be moving on tonight.
For those interested you can monitor the movements of all ship sets on www.igg.fr
MB

[twenty eight]

The rejected takeoff test for the A380 should be in the next couple of weeks.

I wonder if Airbus will release the video.

[Left Coaster]

Just hearing that due to the snow currently falling (again) in YVR, the 380 is not able to depart! Not sure of the scheduled guys, but the tour is on hold! The forecast (Public) calls for up to 15cms of snow, freezing rain and vis down to zero at times. Gale Warning for local waters...What happened to global warning? This is YVR! Toronto hit 17 by the way...:{

[Rollingthunder]

Other media now reporting it actually left on sked at 16:30.

[AlphaWhiskyRomeo]

Other media now reporting it actually left on sked at 16:30.

I can see a flightplan for it to Toulouse which isn't due to depart CYVR until 23.00 UTC on Thursday night.

[DTY/LKS]

Well the A380 is on it's way at the mo. just passed overhead MCT at 1100utc at FL410, callsign AIB404

[taffman]

Yes but this is the new X380 stealth bomber version to replace the B52. No one knows when it leaves so no one knows when or where it will arrive. Dam good stuff out of the frogworks. Strange a lot of secret stuff comes out of smelly places, what was Lockheed’s called?:hmm:

[Xeque]

Saw an A380 over Bangkok yesterday lunchtime. First time I've seen one for real and I was amazed how squat they look. They'll certainly look a lot better when the plugs go in and the fuselage is lengthened.
Does anyone know what they were doing here? It looked as though they'd just departed the old airport at Don Muang. Does that mean the rumours about collapsing taxiways at Suvanabhumi are true? :)

[11Fan]

I heard that Thai was a little miffed about being left out of the route proving pole-to-pole flights, so they got a special visit.

[ZFT]

I heard that Thai was a little miffed about being left out of the route proving pole-to-pole flights, so they got a special visit.


More than a little miffed.

December 7, 2006 : Last updated 07:12 pm (Thai local time)

The Nation

Breakingnews > THAI may dump A380s if talks on compensation fail

THAI may dump A380s if talks on compensation fail
Thai Airways International is considering cancelling its order for six Airbus A380 super-jumbo jets if it fails in negotiations with their European manufacturers over compensation for delays in delivery.

THAI president Apinan Sumanaseni Wednesday said the national carrier originally expected to take delivery of the first A380s in early 2009. Now, it faces a delay of about 22 months, until 2011.

As a result, the airline's network expansion will be affected, particularly on long-haul routes like Bangkok to London, Frankfurt and Paris, on which the company planned to use the larger aircraft instead of increasing the number of flights.

"We are now re-planning our finances because of the delay," Apinan said.

The airline is also re-planning its use of aircraft by increasing load capabilities on long-haul flights to meet higher demand.

The Nation

[hobie]

Saw an A380 over Bangkok yesterday lunchtime. First time I've seen one for real and I was amazed how squat they look.

That was my first impression too ..... this was 004(if I rem correctly) coming in over my back garden on a $$$$$ awfull day ....

http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/5410/dsc00018wu9.jpg

[Xeque]

This is a bit late - sorry pardon!

I was sitting on the balcony of our BKK flat last Tuesday lunchtime (National Hol for the Kings birthday) enjoying an ale when it flew right over me at about 5,000' apparently just out of the old airport at Don Muang.

Strange they didn't go to the new Suvannabhumi but the taxiways are a bit suspect at present so maybe not! :rolleyes:

Anyone know why an A380 might be out here at present?

First time I've seen the a/c for real. Doesn't it look squat!! I'm sure when the plugs are in and the fuselage extended it will look much better.

[Navy_Adversary]

The A380 arrived Bangkok Suvanabhumi on Tuesday afternoon and I saw it on Wednesday morning.
I think that Airbus paid a quick visit to BKK because the aircraft was in SE Asia last week but by-passed Thailand, and Thai air have an order placed for the A380.
Plenty of construction work going on repairing taxiways etc.
The gear of the A380 should even scuff up more problems:)

[groundbum]

a speeded up video showing the construction of the A380s etc, very nicely done. Broadband required pretty much.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbEiHGZtCFA&NR
S

[forget]

Speech - "Born to Fly"
Marion C. Blakey, Toulouse, France
December 12, 2006

A-380
Good afternoon, and thank you.

Today is indeed a great day for aviation. What we see before us today is not just an airplane capable of moving 850 passengers. No, what we see today — what brings us here — is an example of superb cooperation among Airbus, EASA and the FAA; an example of what happens when there's a resolution to get the job done.

This is the first major leap in aircraft capacity in over 35 years. The design and manufacture of the A-380 is a classic case of 21st century engineering. The certificates we present today are a testament to the safety of this airplane. This plane is 300,000 pounds heavier than the next largest passenger commercial airplane. In its largest configuration, it also carries roughly 200 more passengers than any other aircraft on the market. All of aviation, on an international scale, stepped up to the plate to ensure that we were ready to deal with the size of this airplane, especially in terms of airports and airspace. Frankly, we'd never had to deal with something this big.

I think the size of this aircraft is indicative of just how big dreams can be. With a takeoff weight of more than 1.2 million pounds, there's little question that man, in fact, was born to fly. It's the largest and the heaviest commercial airplane ever built.

From a certification standpoint, this was a huge challenge for the FAA and our European colleagues. This is the first-ever concurrent certification between EASA and FAA. And I want to compliment my European colleagues. Today, we're saying that this aircraft is safe for flight. Closer cooperation amongst our technical specialists made it happen. We're grateful for that. The FAA is working hard to run more like a business, and concurrent certification projects can help us get there.

In closing, let me say that this is a good thing, a very good thing. When you bring great minds together, safety is the natural by-product. And safety, after all, is what gives man wings to fly. Again, my congratulations. The A-380 is ready for takeoff.

[arcniz]

Gracious and spirited support from the FAA. Perhaps the host served some wine with the lunch prior?

More power to 'em. Let's all hope the A-380 is successful, lucky, and long-lived!

[Rollingthunder]

As big big big as it is, when all is said and done the personal space for the economy pax is the same only more crowded.

[groundbum]

As big big big as it is, when all is said and done the personal space for the economy pax is the same only more crowded.

a lot of ppruners have said the same as rt, and how uncomfy it will be sharing the same space as 800 other people.

but airbus have said, and I believe them, that from check-in to bag pickup you really won't know that there are two decks and 800 people. With seperate level boarding bridges and so forth it will be like being on a current single deck airliner.

(of course, the immigration queues could be interesting...)

S

[BTDT]

The Airbus A380 received certification from European and U.S. aviation authorities Tuesday, clearing its last official hurdle before the first 555-seater superjumbo is scheduled to be delivered to Singapore Airlines Ltd. next October.
:ok: :ok: :ok:

[aviate1138]

The Airbus A380 received certification from European and U.S. aviation authorities Tuesday, clearing its last official hurdle before the first 555-seater superjumbo is scheduled to be delivered to Singapore Airlines Ltd. next October.
:ok: :ok: :ok:
How odd for an aeroplane that apparently, according to some, has a faulty wing, undercarriage that will rip up most taxiways and questionable crosswind handling has received prompt certification from both Euro and US aviation authorities.
Shame that the decision to offer unlimited variation in Inflight Entertainment has led to such a long delay in delivery times. About time someone invented elastic cabling! :) Good luck, fly well, all A380s.
Aviate1138
P.S. I would put them into service and give everyone books to read.

[josemarb]

Here I post a videolink:
http://www.airbus.com/store/photolibrary/EVENTS/CEREMONY/video/att00008737/media_object_file_lowres_CeremonieA380Certification_Flash240 X180.swf

happy landings!

[Xeque]

Agree! The A330/340 brought us 2-4-2 seating which was a blessing. OK the pitch varied but that gave you the opportunity to choose your airline carefully.

The A380 offers 2-4-2 on the upper deck and that is (obviously) where most savvy economy passengers will be pushing to sit. Down below, however, the 3-5-3 arrangement is retrograde and places us back into the 60's when the 747 first arrived.

We need a major re-think on how economy passengers can benefit from this bigger aeroplane.

Remember, its economy that is the bread and butter of all airlines - not the privileged few who go Biz or First at their employers expence!

[npasque]

so have any airports actually installed airbridges which can reach the second deck of the A380 yet?
I'd love to see the A380 rip a massive hole in the runway surface when the pilot accidently puts her down a little harder than usual! oops! :}

i just hope to god that one never crashes, 800 souls..... that would be a dark day for aviation!

[silverelise]

What's wrong with 3-5-3 out of interest?

[Old Aero Guy]

Great news for Airbus. The whole organization must have a profound sense of relief and accomplishnment.

The Airbus A380 received certification from European and U.S. aviation authorities Tuesday, clearing its last official hurdle before the first 555-seater superjumbo is scheduled to be delivered to Singapore Airlines Ltd. next October.
:ok: :ok: :ok:

While the Type Certificate is a major milestone on the road to delivery, it's not the last official hurdle. The A380 still needs to obtain a Production Certificate. In addition, each Customer Airline interior must be certified.


Given the production difficulties the A380 has experienced and the Airbus position that most of them have been related to customer specific interiors, there appears to be alot of work with the Certifying Agencies ahead.

[chornedsnorkack]

so have any airports actually installed airbridges which can reach the second deck of the A380 yet?
I'd love to see the A380 rip a massive hole in the runway surface when the pilot accidently puts her down a little harder than usual! oops! :}

Like 747 or any other huge plane, 380 is light for its area.

i just hope to god that one never crashes, 800 souls..... that would be a dark day for aviation!

What about 2 A380-s crashing? The two worst air crashes so far involve 747-s - JAL 747SR crash and Tenerife collision of 2 747-s.

Anyway, as for 3-5-3 seating, no airline has said they would have it. Which does not mean they will not.

A380 lower deck is wider than 747, but 11 abreast in A380 would be less spacious than 10 abreast in B747. However, 11 abreast in A380 is about exactly as spacious as 10 abreast in B777 - and while the airlines having 10 abreast in 777 are a minority, they include several prominent A380 customers.

A330 is no guarantee of 2-4-2, though. Several airlines have 9 abreast in A330. Which is even more cramped than 10 abreast in B777. A380 upper deck is wider than A330 - so 9 abreast on A380 upper deck is doable!

[vapilot2004]

Great speech! Short and decidedly sweet. :D
Later that day Ms. Blakey was given the keys to the city of Toulouse and will receive the Order of Arts and Letters in a separate ceremony. :}

Ms. Blakey was appointed head of the FAA by the Bush administration in 2002. Many may recall Blakey's role in the AA587 investigation as the newly installed chairman of the NTSB in 2001. Her prior aviation experience was as a principal in a transportation lobbyist group in Washington specializing in international relations.


The concurrent EASA/FAA certification process must have saved EADS quite a few euros. It's a good idea - should we expect more of the same for future aircraft certs?

[Old Aero Guy]

The concurrent EASA/FAA certification process must have saved EADS quite a few euros. It's a good idea - should we expect more of the same for future aircraft certs?

Over the past ten years or so, it has been a common practice for Airbus and Boeing aircraft to recieve a concurrent FAA/EASA (or JAA before the advent of EASA) Type Certificate. The A380 is merely the latest in the line.

[panda-k-bear]

And Airbus has just announced that SQ have signed for the additional 9 A380s plus more (6, I think it said?) options.

[panda-k-bear]

And now the Aussies have confirmed their order for 8 - so Airbus have 17 orders from 2 customers for the A380 in 2 days. Not bad. :ok:

[25check]

And now the Aussies have confirmed their order for 8 - so Airbus have 17 orders from 2 customers for the A380 in 2 days. Not bad. :ok:


Except that the SIA order was announced at Farnborough show so hardly news.

Also, how can giving away aircraft in lieu of compensation be called a success?

[panda-k-bear]

Who said they were given away? Know that for a fact? Or did you just make that bit up? And actually signing a deal is a bit different to announcing the intention to sign a deal, don't you agree?

Are you another doomsayer? Determoned that the A380 will fail? Why? Because it's not a Boeing? :ugh:

Is the end of the world nigh? :E

I would say that 17 more A380s on Airbus' books is a good thing. So I reiterate :ok: :ok: and once more :ok:

[cessna l plate]

Reported on the news this morning that Emirates are now seeking compensation over delays. With Fed-Ex and others moaning heavily, could the wheel that is Airbus be about to come off??

[Oshkosh George]

Guess it had to be the Middle East then?--

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/301644_airbus30.html

[Kestrel_909]

Going to be a bit more limited in where you can fly and leave it over night then:}

[Albert Driver]

Well, what else can you do when all your wives want to go to Harrods on the same day.

[nosefirsteverytime]

Why have I an image of an A380 looking on as a giant laser beam shoots from the sky toward Fort Knox, accompanied by maniacal laughter coming from within?

[The Otter's Pocket]

When some f-in tree hugger has a go at me for my 4x4 I will point them to this link.
Makes a mokery of the green recycling tubs in our town.
Its just Middle-Eastern one upmanship, just tell them that Gaddafi has his own country, that will miff them off.

[chornedsnorkack]

The main limitation is wingspan. 79,8 m for A380, versus 64,4 m for B747-400 or 59,6 m for B747-200 and B747SP, which the 380 buyers probably had before.

Can you list airports where 747 can fly, but A380 plainly cannot?

[Intruder]

BFI (King County / Boeing Field, downtown Seattle) :)

[nosefirsteverytime]

First Buyer For the Airbus A380 'Flying Palace' (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20070220/sc_space/firstbuyerfortheairbusa380flyingpalace)

It seems someone's shelled out to get a bigger private plane than Air Force One.

Why am I reminded of Die Another Day?

[vapilot2004]

Any chance the new owner is an Arab royal? :8

[tilewood]

Cherie bought it on Ebay!!

[Just a spotter]

United Parcel Service (UPS) has signed a new agreement with Airbus that changes the delivery dates for the ten A380 aircraft it has ordered. The new agreement allows UPS to cancel its order if there are any more delays.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6390269.stm


JAS

[fire wall]

From (Reuters) - Friday 2nd March
"Troubled Airbus suffered its second blow in a week on Friday when the last customer for the freight version of its A380 superjumbo dropped the aircraft maker, days after it announced it was cutting 10,000 jobs. "

In addition the Fin Review has a report re the rising anger in the French aerospace unions ( union president declared the culling of 10000 jobs "an act of war" ) and their decision to call a halt to the production line.

Got to make the taxpayers of the various consortium countries worried.

[Colonel Klink]

I suppose it would not be unreasonable to expect a big order from Boeing on the heels of this cancellation. Maybe 747-800's? The A380 programme will be lucky to survive this, even despite the sales to date of the passenger version, which apart from Qantas' top up order, have been few and far between. Should be an interesting year!

[Whitehatter]

Since when did all sales have to be before an aircraft goes into service?

Are you saying that all the 747s being delivered today, and since 1969, were ordered in the 1960s?

[OverRun]

Goodness me - what a load of codswallop in this thread. This was a win-win deal. That means, for the journalists, both sides won with the cancellation.