Originally Posted by
sizematters
Because it is a heap of Crap !!!!
Could I ask what technical basis you have to make that assessment ? Do you have access to the flight testing data ?
Airbus have 26 380s airframes built, granted none delivered due to a almightily production stuff up.
Flight testing has shown it is burning 17% less fuel than a
747-800, more than capable of climbing to FL350 in 30 minutes and doing 16 hour sector with 555 pax. In your terms LAX-HKG with an average headwind of 100 kts with 555 pax.
Tomorrow the final route proving flight should depart TLS before EASA and FAA certification on December 13, 2006. The route is TLS-JNB direct, JNB-SYD direct, SYD-YVR direct, YVR-TLS direct. SYD-YVR is longer than LAX-HKG.
As for runway/taxiway usage I understand the 747-800 and A380 are both ICAO CAT F due to their wing spans.
Originally Posted by moosp
Apparently happened a couple or three years ago
Sounds to me like a bit of a tall story. Both engine and airframe manufactures have field representative agents embedded in airlines that bear the brunt of problems from the customer airlines on a daily basis. The 346 has settled down after its initial introduction which everyone agrees was ordinary.
Originally Posted by funkymonk
Does anyone know where to see those?
I know the ones you were talking about, they were part of destructive testing, it was not a fault with the gear as some people embellished.
The photos are of a successful test where they turn the aircraft beyond the towing limits.