PDA

View Full Version : A380 will not make London QC2 for takeoff


747FOCAL
13th Jul 2004, 19:22
Just heard a little rumor, actually it would be a big rumor if it turns out true.

Airbus is having problems making projected QC2 departure and will/may fail contract obligations. Here is what I was told the projected noise levels are at currently:

A380

TO = 98.9

SL= 96.7

AP = 99.9

Could this be why, besides the weight problem, that Virgin and Air France have pushed off delivery so Airbus has time to run a noise reduction program as well as put the A380 on a diet?

:confused:

safetypee
13th Jul 2004, 20:29
747FOCAL, only just a little rumor from Seattle in the week before Farnborough? !!

Go fly another kite.

747FOCAL
13th Jul 2004, 20:52
Take a look for yourself:

http://www.dglr.de/veranstaltungen/archiv/focusing-technology/2004-05-12_Thomas.pdf

Figure 11

Airbus's own presentation shows them clearly over the QC2 mark and on an NIP program to meet their goal.

I say you eat crow. :E

safetypee
13th Jul 2004, 22:31
I do not interpret the data as supporting your argument, are you using Boeing blinkers? *
From the reference, Fig 11 details the two components of noise reduction; the additive result for all A3XX aircraft is below the QC2 limit. This is reinforced in figs 13 - 14 where the technical target is below the limit and the objective even lower; all values still well below those of a 747.

* Boeing blinkers – rose tinted glasses, when used in Seattle provide slight magnification, but become increasingly darker and distorted when used in Europe.

747FOCAL
13th Jul 2004, 23:43
Come now. It clearly says that this is a technical target on the other pages not where they are. You better look at what the London area airports are showing for A380 "projected" noise levels are at. :)

No Boeing blinkers. I don't work for them.

In case your wondering. NIP = Noise Improvement Program.

This means they are not where they want to be and just like the weight are trying to diet to where they want to be.

Don't worry. Noel is going to have to answer some tough questions at the Farn. I here several of the customers have heard and are coming for him. :}

ettamakwetta
14th Jul 2004, 00:03
The reason why Virgin wants a delay in delivery is because the airport terminals at LAX will not be ready for the projected in service date. This is I guess the main route that they want to use this aircraft on, so it does make sense to delay for the moment. I can't comment on Air France though.

411A
14th Jul 2004, 02:53
Oddly enough, the Los Angeles Department of Airports has steadfastly maintained that the airport will be fully ready for A380 arrivals in time to meet the Virgin original schedule.

Perhaps Sir Richard is having cold feet.:ugh::uhoh:

747FOCAL
14th Jul 2004, 05:22
And because our politicians are pro aviation, as long as it meets stage 3 it will have no operational restrictions in the USA. :E

411A
14th Jul 2004, 06:31
Indeed, we even allowed Concorde....only thing louder was the Saturn 5 rocket:E :ooh: :ooh:

Sudden thought...maybe the A380 will need 'hushkits'.
You know, those really nasty things that the Europeans don't like...:{

BahrainLad
14th Jul 2004, 07:31
"only thing louder was the Saturn 5 rocket"......or a 707!

trainer too 2
14th Jul 2004, 08:28
To all you scare mongering yanks:

Size does matter and ours will be bigger than yours!!!!!

:ok:

BahrainLad
14th Jul 2004, 09:40
It's funny how the most controversial aircraft of their time are the ones that are European showing the Yanks that we can beat them at their own game.

Don't act so bruised guys, I'm sure that when the 7E7 turns up it'll be really......erm.......efficient......

Globaliser
14th Jul 2004, 10:30
Anyone have a date for that document? I notice that figure 9 says:-• Initial Airports assumed for A380 Airline Operations and
Alternates:
�� 6 in Europe: LHR , STN, LGW, MAN, CDG,FRA,
�� 6 in Asia: DOH, SIN, HKG, BKK, NRT, KIX,
�� 11 in North America: JFK, EWR, LAX, SFO, MIA, ANC, IND, MCO, MEM, ORD, YUL
�� 1 in Australia: SYDEK is a big A380 customer. EK operates from where? Hello?

Ace Rimmer
14th Jul 2004, 13:22
411A: Yes they will be able to 'handle' the aircraft but for the moment parking will be at remote (very) remote stands.
VS say this ain't good enough and they want terminal (with double jetway) access or they ain't coming with the big one - or at least that's what VS told me...

Flip Flop Flyer
14th Jul 2004, 13:38
Isn't the noise problem, if true, an issue for engine makers RR and PW/GE?

747FOCAL
14th Jul 2004, 14:48
No the noise problem will be Airbus's because it is them that guaranteed QC2 departure to their customers. :(

411A
14th Jul 2004, 15:04
Ace Rimmer,

Suspect you are right, the western romotes may well be required use.

But they do have jetways (at least some do anyway).
Suspect fitting the A380 at terminal 2 will be a tight...really tight.:ugh:

747FOCAL
14th Jul 2004, 15:44
Just so that people will stop thinking I am taking pot shots at the A380 there are a few things I would like to say.

First off, this is a rumor section. I heard a rumor and brought it here to see if anybody else was hearing same and to open discussion. To my knowledge, I am not known for spouting lies around here.

Second, Airbus has done amazingly well at getting the noise numbers to where they are for an aircraft that is 30% larger than a 747-400. In the past ten years there have been no significant noise reduction hardware developed and none in the foreseeable future. If those noise numbers posted earlier are correct, Airbus has accomplished an amazing feat vs. the 747 noise levels and I commend them.

For example, the 747-400 at 652,000 approach weight rings around 103.8 EPNdB vs 99.9 EPNdB for the A380. To a layman, that may seem very small, but in the real world that means the A380 is half+ as noisy as the 747-400. -3 dB difference halves the energy of the noise.

As far as noise reduction goes, the entire industry is up against a technological barrier and has been for some time. We can get small reductions here and there or do what Airbus admitted and enlarged the fan diameter (as bypass ratio goes up noise goes down), but then performance suffers. If they truly are in a noise reduction program, it’s the last few dB or tenths of dB that are extremely hard to get. With the technological barriers we have today, that last little bit can be downright impossible.


:ugh:

Point Seven
14th Jul 2004, 15:54
Stands for the A380 at LHR won't be remote stands but not all will have dual jetways.

P7

No comment
14th Jul 2004, 19:06
So is it a QC4 then? If so, wont be able to schedule it in the night at LGW. Can't imagine that much need for that though unless its Ex divert/tech in which case it will be stuck until the morning...

747FOCAL
14th Jul 2004, 19:56
I agree, but wouldn't airlines that were guaranteed that it would be QC2 want some money?

mordien
14th Jul 2004, 20:50
I hope you don't mind me asking, but what does QC2/QC4 mean?

Volume
15th Jul 2004, 06:46
747Focal "We can get small reductions here and there"
"the last few dB or tenths of dB that are extremely hard to get"

A research program showed that initial approach noise (flaps down but gear still up) can be reduced by 75% if the flap end ribs are closed by simple foam blocks glued in and by small vortex generators at the outer end of the flap.

Some facts can be readhere (http://213.198.75.194/en/html/ueber_uns/balance/umwelt_sozialthemen/forschungsprojekte/) (scroll down to ´Joint project Quiet Traffic´) but I´m still searching the web for the full report in english. A short summary in german can be read here (http://www2.dlr.de/oeffentlichkeit/nachrichten/102/52-55.pdf).

No comment
15th Jul 2004, 11:20
Mordien, in my limited knowledge the QC scale is a rating based on dB of aircraft on approach or departure. A lot of airports use the QC as a way of limiting night noise. For instance there is a QC4 ban at night for LGW so aircraft QC4 and over (with a couple of exemptions) are not allowed to be scheduled into the night period. Think the numbers are QC0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8 & 16.

Roughly speaking, 757/320/737 etc range anywhere from QC0.5 to QC2. DC-10s in general are QC4, 742s might be QC4 on arrival but QC8/16 on departure. Concorde was a QC16 and so is the An-124.

Toulouse
15th Jul 2004, 14:18
Come on 747Focal. I tend to read a lot of posts by you (you appear to post alot), and some of the time I find them really quite interesting, but let' say, 80% of the time all you do is appear to jump at any opportunity to knock an Airbus aircraft! That's when your posts become a little less interesting.

Not wanting to insult you (I assure you that is not my intention), but could you just drop the Airbus bashing and inciting AvB wars. I think most of us are getting a bit fed up with it!

Actually, since I started redaing these forums (not just pprune) and there are soooo many Americans who seem to get some sort of kick out of knocking Airbus (simply and clearly because it's not from the U S A), I've actually started finding myself thinking "oh, come Airbus, get another order for your 380 or whatever", I read about an order for the 7E7 and I think "darn, not an order for Boeing"... Then I have to very quickly say to myslef "what a load of rubbish".
I've always loved airplanes, be it Airbus, Boeing, whatever... so STOP creating these silly prejudices.
:ok:

747FOCAL
15th Jul 2004, 15:57
Volume,

I know a lot about aircraft noise reduction and certification. I see all that stuff on a regular basis. Yes, some of it works, but a lot is impractical in the commercial aviation environment.

Also, aircraft noise certification is done gear down for approach and that gear makes a LOT of noise.

Come now Toulouse, if you truly read all my posts you know I bash Boeing every bit as much. There are plenty of A vs B threads around here. I never want thread to turn into A vs B, but since your countrymen like to turn it that way it always seems to end up that way. :hmm:

Fly3
16th Jul 2004, 06:27
My B744 regularly busts the noise limits out of LHR during the summer months but we just keep paying the fines. Guess A380 operators will do the same if they have to.

747FOCAL
16th Jul 2004, 07:45
You know there are certain things that can minimize the chances of that occuring. PM me if you would like some suggestions.

SR71
16th Jul 2004, 08:13
Flip Flop Flyer

Isn't the noise problem, if true, an issue for engine makers RR and PW/GE?
To me Fig 12 of the document answers your question for the T/O and APP phases of flight.

The responsbility is dual as the major contributors to "noise" change depending on which phase of flight you're in...

I can't quite figure out Fig 13 tho. I don't understand why the top of the blue column on the London departure doesn't coincide with the black "Objective" line because surely the blue represents the objective?

FWIW.

747FOCAL
16th Jul 2004, 17:09
SR71,

Generally the final guarantee on the noise levels is the responsibility of the airframe manufacturer. The engine manufacturer is responsible to the airframe manufacturer. Too many variables can effect final noise levels for the engine manufacturer to be totally resposible for any phase of flight. Now that does not say if their is a problem after certification that the engine manufacturer will not work hard to help reduce noise levels coming from the engine to help over all noise levels. Just ask Rolls about the 744 and the 767. :E

canuck slf
16th Jul 2004, 18:39
WRT to AF A380 delivery delay. This maybe connected to CDG terminal collapse. This terminal was to be used for A380. Apparently there has consideration by ADP of total demolition and rebuild of the entire terminal, which would make A380 operations somewhat problematic for AF at their home base.
Was the AF delay announced pre or post terminal collapse, which was on May 23?

panda-k-bear
19th Jul 2004, 13:52
Hmm. Noise - I hate all this noise stuff. Far too complex for my tiny brain to cope with.

Sorry I haven't posted. It's taken me this long to come round. I fainted after FOCAL said something that was a) nice and b) not related to emergency escape as regards the A380.

Sorry, old chap, but you really do only ever seem to attack the A380 and I can't recall you attacking Boeing products with such vigour.

Product A have developed a chevron nozzle for their '21s, as I recall. Do they have similar on the A380 for noise reduction?

747FOCAL
19th Jul 2004, 14:25
I think you might see chevrons on the primary, but not the secondary. The secondary ones tend to drive fuel burn rate up an unnaceptable amount. All chevrons cause some performance loss. It's the gift that keeps on giving, or in this case taking. :E

and I am neither a) old and b) have said plenty of nice things around here. :(

panda-k-bear
19th Jul 2004, 16:58
About the A380?

Go on, say something else nice. Oh, puleeze! Pretty please....

747FOCAL
19th Jul 2004, 17:47
Hopefully I get to fly first class on her someday. That looks really nice from the pics I have seen. The only bad thing about the bar is if you happen to pick somebody up you got nowhere to go but the biffy..........:E

rotornut
20th Jul 2004, 21:03
747 FOCAL,

You didn't say anything nice about me but you have my condolences to-day as Airbus just sold a bunch more including four 380s.
;)

P.S. If you're on a Virgin 380 you can always rent one of their roomettes down in the hold. :p

747FOCAL
20th Jul 2004, 21:27
Good for Airbus. How much is that room? :E

rotornut
21st Jul 2004, 17:20
Expensive, I'll bet. Branson was talking about all sorts of frills on the big one- roomettes, health club, casino, etc..

747FOCAL
21st Jul 2004, 17:34
I find it amazing in this day and age that it would be legal to rent somebody a room on a passenger aircraft where they could lock the door and go in there and be doing anything. And I am not talking about joining the mile high club.

They could take something and bash a window out. Undo a panel and jab something through the skin. I mean, they could literally build the bomb in complete privacy over the 18 hours of flight.

rotornut
21st Jul 2004, 19:49
Good point. I'll try and find the reference to these private rooms. I think it's on the Airbus website. :8

rotornut
22nd Jul 2004, 19:13
Gee, I couldn't find very much on either Airbus' or Virgin's websites about these rooms. Only references to them but no pictures. I do remember seeing a mockup of one of these roomettes a while ago on the Airbus site - it showed an attractive lady with her charming kids getting ready for bed, as I recall. As to the security aspect, I suppose they could search you before you go into one. And I bet they'll be darned expensive.

Noise Unit
22nd Jul 2004, 19:43
I'm afraid to say that this whole waste of heat as it is obsolete.

The news about the A380 NIP is years out of date and the NIP is a done deal through completed engine design and airframe changes.

Whether the A380 hits the noise targets is still to be determined.

Cheers

Noise Unit

747FOCAL
22nd Jul 2004, 20:15
Noise Unit,

Yah, I have since found out how old it is, but the person told me they did not hit the mark and they still have some dB to go before they will get QC2. He would not tell me how much further they have to go and at what point(s) of the 3 they need reduction. :)