Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

A380 - little things.

Old 27th Oct 2016, 13:17
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,235
Received 108 Likes on 64 Posts
Andy s / Dave Reid
Not a fan of any manufacture in particular though do have preferred airlines. As for pressure and atmosphere I will only say that I have been doing LH flying since I was 8 ( back and forth for school) and being doing it as part of my work since graduation, and clock up about 300-350k miles per year. My observation is that I prefer the 380 to other metal I have flown, and also the types you have mentioned. In fact I try to avoid the 787 and have only done a very few sectors on 350. However I am not a fan of 330 so not anti Boeing, as such, and obviously spent many years in 747/ 707. As for Concorde one sector only so can not really comment though it was cramped for 6ft + frame !
Mr Mac is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2016, 16:38
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 58
Posts: 949
Received 38 Likes on 22 Posts
Originally Posted by Mr Mac
Not a fan of any manufacture in particular though do have preferred airlines.
I would whole heartedly endorse that.

I honestly don’t have a problem with the A380. I’ve not flown it many times, but those times I have (economy class only) were perfectly satisfactory journeys. Whether that was down to the A380 itself or Singapore Airlines in flight service I really couldn’t say.

I’m just alternately amused and riled by the wide eyed breathless prose written by some in praise of the aircraft, as if the A380 was some sort of palace in the sky offering a fundamental step change in the air travel experience. Claims by some here that they’ll go to almost any lengths, pay any premium or travel any routing, no matter how inconvenient, in order to fly on a 380 I find somewhat bizarre. Well, fair enough if you really like the aircraft that much. But I do think a lot of it is in the mind. If you’ve convinced yourself that the A380 is the last word in passenger comfort then you’ll probably feel like it was a good flight. Equally, if you’ve convinced yourself that the same journey in a 777 is going to be a vile experience then it will be; you’ll actively find things to disapprove of.

I think some people get very fixated on aircraft type. At the end of the day they are all still aircraft, and somewhat less comfortable than your own front room. If everything else was equal I would probably pick a 380 over a 777, but things are rarely equal. Cost, timing and airline are all more important to me than equipment type.
Andy_S is online now  
Old 27th Oct 2016, 18:01
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I really liked CP Air's DC8-63s! Lots of legroom, China and silver service, even in Y.
ExXB is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2016, 05:53
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,235
Received 108 Likes on 64 Posts
ExXB
Would that be the bright Orange with a Red swirl ones ? I never flew with CP Air as they had ceased operations, or were not going my way, but I do remember seeing them. Quite a startling early 70,s colour scheme similar to the Texan airline Baniff I think. But you have to remember back then you got China and Silver Service on most large carriers in Y - definitely on BCAL anyway.
I think it all started to change in the mid to late 80,s in Y class and the 90,s recession accelerated it and hence where we are today. But also look what you had to pay back then in real terms compared with todays prices !
Mr Mac is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2016, 12:22
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The A380 produces 50% less cabin noise than a 747 and has higher cabin air pressure (equivalent to an altitude of 1500 metres (5000 ft) versus 2500 metres (8000 ft)); both features are expected to reduce the effects of travel fatigue.
https://www.globalaircraft.org/planes/airbus_a380.pl
Mark in CA is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2016, 14:30
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,784
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
The A380 produces 50% less cabin noise than a 747 and has higher cabin air pressure (equivalent to an altitude of 1500 metres (5000 ft) versus 2500 metres (8000 ft)); both features are expected to reduce the effects of travel fatigue.
Based on its maximum differential pressure of 8.6 psi, the A380 is capable of maintaining a 5000' cabin up to approximately 34,000' altitude.

The 747 (all series) has a max diff of 8.9 psi, which would allow a 5000' cabin up to around 35,800'.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2016, 06:55
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A380

just had my first A380 exoerience BA Miami- LHR in premier economy- very imprseed- the take off roll seemed much slower and laboured than others but lift off effortless- not sure how full we were but not much spare space on upper deck- faultlessly smooth landing
KLOS is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2016, 16:02
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 382
Received 11 Likes on 4 Posts
The A380 produces 50% less cabin noise than a 747
I may be incorrect but I thought I was told some years ago that the A380 cabin panels have transducers on their rear, so as to act as a noise cancelling headset ? At least that was in the design but whether it made it through to the finished aircraft ......
GrahamO is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 01:47
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I seriously doubt that they can use active noise cancelling to deal with noise on an airliner. Active noise cancelling sends out sound wave to exactly cancel out the noise at a specific point in space. The drawback is that you are actually putting more sound into the environment, so half a wavelength away from that spot, you actually have twice the noise. In ear active noise cancelling works because you are only interested in removing noise at one fixed point - the ear. For out-of-multiple ears active noise cancelling, you are going to need
1. head restraints to keep the ears in specific spots (or some form of ear detectors + many times the computing power for 2).
2. a super computer on board to calculate how to modulate all the panels to reduce or cancel out all the noises at all the ears of all the passengers.

A quick google showed that while the A380 has patented ways of reducing the engine fan noise, it does not use active in-cabin noise cancelling.
cee cee is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 05:29
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The deHavilland Dash 8s have had active noise cancelling since around 1997. I.e. Those designated with a Q ... so not impossible but likely difficult to scale up.
ExXB is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 11:22
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks for that interesting info, ExXB, I wonder how effective it is and how much the noise varies throughout the cabin.

A quick google puts the engine noise at between 50 to 150Hz, which puts the half-wavelength at 1 to 3m, which will probably cover the width of the cabin. Vertically should be easy, just make the top of the headrest the sweet spot. The only thing I cannot get my head around is how they managed it along the cabin. I guess they are just reducing the noise, not eliminating it, so it may make it a bit easier.

I am not an acoustic engineer, just an EE. The technology itself is not hard to understand, but is hard to implement in a multiple-target and multiple-transmitter scenario. I was checking out a (failed) startup around ten years ago that tried to use the same idea to increase data rate from multiple fixed antennas to multiple separate recipients.

Addendum:
After giving it further thought and looking at the placement of the mics and speakers, I think the left half of the noise cancelling deals with primarily with the noise from the left engine and the right half deals with the right engine. It being a narrow body, single aisle aircraft, the aisle is probably noisier with the noise cancelling than without. ie, the noise is pushed into the aisle. Since passengers are generally seated, especially during the noisier take-offs and landings, it seems to be a good trade-off.

Last edited by cee cee; 28th Dec 2016 at 11:34. Reason: Addendum
cee cee is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 18:50
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ---------->
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by yellowtriumph
Our take off, at both airports, seemed slow and ponderous.
As a former local resident of Heathrow, the aircraft and engine manufacturers deserve enormous respect for what they've achieved with the A380 and 787 - slow and ponderous it may be to passengers, quiet and low stress is what it means for residents near airports.

From the ground the 747 now just looks and sounds like yesterday's technology.
EGLD is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 11:23
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,390
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Hartington
One was the initial acceleration surge; there was a very noticeable initial push as we began our take off run
Was it very windy/gusty?
If windshear is reported, some airlines require max thrust to be used instead of a calculated reduced thrust.
Basil is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 17:19
  #34 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,221
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
I've flown out of San Francisco several times on 747 non-stops back to London. The A380 departure didn't feel significantly different in terms of wind or routing from those 747s. The departure routing has been from one of the 28 runways (usually 28R I think) straight on over the peninsular ridge, turn right up the coast and right again through the Golden Gate. The only exception was a United 777 when we did a "Shoreline 9" departure (UA channel 9 was on) which was a very spirited departure and an immediate right turn after take off to follow (as far as I could tell) the shore of the Bay without crossing the Peninsular.

The weather when we arrived (on a 777 from London) was very different and we nearly diverted to Oakland apparently. We landed on 19R which I believe is pretty rare. The usual pattern I've seen at SFO has been 28 for landings and 1 for most departures with heavy departures using a 28.
Hartington is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2016, 03:58
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: down under
Posts: 462
Received 10 Likes on 5 Posts
as a reasonably frequent flier, I love the A380, because to my ears it's a lot quieter than anything else I've flown on, but I've yet to fly on an 787.
cooperplace is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2016, 13:53
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I've heard that BA pipe artificial noise in the cabin because it is too quiet that passengers were complaining about the noise from others. Not sure if its true.
Peter47 is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2017, 14:34
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 335
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I like the space and quietness afforded by the 380, but wish that it had the clean air that the 787 excels at. Aerotoxic Association - Aerotoxic Association
snooky is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2017, 22:04
  #38 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flown QF A380 in Business, upper deck, didn't like the double seat row either side, made life quite difficult for the inside window seat when trying to get in and out with other pax fully bedded down, centre row not a problem. Have now done several sectors on SIA, A380, Business Class, upper deck, different altogether, single row only down the windows side, double in the middle, everyone free to move unrestricted. Seat configuration and quality of cabin service, for me, will win every time.

EGLD - The B747, like the VC10 still a beautiful aircraft to look at, something the A380,(The Dugong), can never be!
parabellum is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2017, 17:12
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,759
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
A plane, Beautiful???????????

A picture, say, a Monet, perhaps a car - Lotus Elan, and often a woman - your Kate and your Nicole, for instance, but never a plane. Maybe a tiny amount of beauty in a Concorde, I suppose.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2017, 01:15
  #40 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fairly sure you are in a minority there Ancient Observer! Very few beautiful cars around, a Bentley Continental perhaps. Neither Kate or Nicole would rate with me as beautiful and I would prefer a Constable over a Monet any day. As you can see Ancient Observer, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
parabellum is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.