A380 AOG at LHR?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A380 AOG at LHR?
Just wondering how many there are this time, is it one or two? Not like you would hear anything about it from official sources. But there sure are a lot of 380 crew spending a lot of extra time in London these days, with their flights regularly being covered by Boeings...
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The lion city
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas A380 also grounded in LAX. As I understand that B747-400 never had any problems when it entered service in 1988.
Qantas A380 grounded in Los Angeles - Travel - smh.com.au
Qantas A380 grounded in Los Angeles - Travel - smh.com.au
Guest
Posts: n/a
etops777
A tad unfair to compare a brand new Shiny A380 with a B747-400. Rather compare it to the original B747. i.e. That couldn't maintain height on 3 engines, couldn't taxi without overheating unless taxying into wind are a couple of issues that come to mind.
Cheers
A tad unfair to compare a brand new Shiny A380 with a B747-400. Rather compare it to the original B747. i.e. That couldn't maintain height on 3 engines, couldn't taxi without overheating unless taxying into wind are a couple of issues that come to mind.
Cheers
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The lion city
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vercingetorix,
I think it was a fair comparison between a B747-400(it was new when it debuted back in 1988- with new engines, glass cockpit and a new wing) to an A380.
Cheers
ETOPS777
I think it was a fair comparison between a B747-400(it was new when it debuted back in 1988- with new engines, glass cockpit and a new wing) to an A380.
Cheers
ETOPS777
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope
I don't agree Mr ETOPs. I have flown the 74-200, TriStar (lots of little 'planes as well) and now the 330. The 74-400 is not a 'new' machine, just an old tart dressed up. Didn't really enjoy the 74, especially compared to the 1011. 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: pit
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
still wondering what's really new about the whale.
blown up 340, same technology on construction, engines, cockpit, .. - .. oh, I forgot the leaking shower, yes that's new.
listening to our engineers no one is really upset, as they sarcastically pretend it makes more money aog than flying ....
blown up 340, same technology on construction, engines, cockpit, .. - .. oh, I forgot the leaking shower, yes that's new.
listening to our engineers no one is really upset, as they sarcastically pretend it makes more money aog than flying ....
As I understand that B747-400 never had any problems when it entered service in 1988.
It used to fall over on a regular basis. Umpteen EICAS messages popping up for no reason at all just before departure would cause lengthy delays.
Usually the only way to get rid of them was to reboot the a/c from cold. Not very professional when the craft is full of pax.
New technology takes a while to settle down, especially as the people flying and certifying them as fit to fly, are a bit short of experience on type.
Everyone errs on the side of safety until they 'know' what is a glitch that can be dealt with by a quick CB/Reset and what a genuine defect.
Be safe.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The lion city
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No joke,
I have flown B747-400 and it is not a "dressed up" 747. Apart from ECL and FBW, the automation on B747-400 is absolutely same as B777. I agree, L1011have had great technologies for an airplane from the 60s and people whom have flown it, including(DC10, B727) all had great remarks.
I have flown B747-400 and it is not a "dressed up" 747. Apart from ECL and FBW, the automation on B747-400 is absolutely same as B777. I agree, L1011have had great technologies for an airplane from the 60s and people whom have flown it, including(DC10, B727) all had great remarks.
I have flown B747-400 and it is not a "dressed up" 747. Apart from ECL and FBW, the automation on B747-400 is absolutely same as B777.
Not sure where this is going ref A380 unservicability.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: 25/55
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
744
The B744 was recertified as a new type and not a variant of the old classic. Airbus has yet to produce a good airplane period. Airplanes certified many years ago neither had the luxury of CAD/CAM as they do now. Still with all the gee whizz stuff at their disposal now, the French can't produce a decent airplane.
PS. In my years of flying the 4, not so much as an hours delay because of a technical. AOG? not in the 400's vocab! 380 - Pile of crap!
PS. In my years of flying the 4, not so much as an hours delay because of a technical. AOG? not in the 400's vocab! 380 - Pile of crap!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Relaxxxxxx...while I'm not above needling a Toulouse jockey from time to time, it's all in good fun. The 787 will no doubt give much fodder - already is - for the people who like to play "my airplane is better than yours". Any new type has teething problems - but I'm not sure one can blithely dismiss a ferry flight to HAM as a "teething problem".
Hence, since we're all "getting real", how about some hard gen about those problems? That was the actually the question initially. Perhaps comparisons to the introductions of other types can be a fascinating topic for another thread.
Hence, since we're all "getting real", how about some hard gen about those problems? That was the actually the question initially. Perhaps comparisons to the introductions of other types can be a fascinating topic for another thread.
