Originally Posted by
ZAGORFLY
Yes, you have done. Thank you!
Do you have the Vref (adverage) for the a380?
the point I was making is that I will probably avoid to fly in an airplane where save weight economics are like using a thinner wire to suspend a blade over my head.
5000 psi (like the Concorde, and the B787 after all) in order to carry less fluid and using thinner pipes is a technical achievement that I wonder is really needed because the airplan is too fat to be safe.
As pasenger instead I am looking foward to fly on the B787 where more Safety/attention to passengers than "size" in term of advanced technlogy and enviroment enhancement for the "customer" is at least has been advertised.
A380 Vref is about 140 kt at MLW (386t), 748/77W is about 160 kt. The A380 landing distance is under 1900m at MLW. As far as I know landing distance for all aircraft is based on the use of no reverse, this may have been an issue with the 737NG that went off the end of a runway in America.
The wall thickness of the pipes in most cases will not be thinner, actually thicker. To carry the required force in the hydraulics to operate the controls etc you either need a lot more 3000 psi fluid (meaning larger diameter pipes and more fluid) or less 5000 psi fluid which can carried in smaller diameter pipes. The reference to thickness above should be diameter, not wall thickness of the pipes.
As a 787 passenger you maybe interested in reading this
Boeing focuses on weight not rate, easing back on production study to focus on lighter twinjet,
ramping up spending on weight-saving initiatives to close the gap with its original targets