Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > Questions
Reload this Page >

Airbus A380 Design

Wikiposts
Search
Questions If you are a professional pilot or your work involves professional aviation please use this forum for questions. Enthusiasts, please use the 'Spectators Balcony' forum.

Airbus A380 Design

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 19th Aug 2003, 19:07
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Airbus A380 Design

Does anyone know the design reason why the flight-deck on the A380 is located on the lower deck, and not on the upper desk, like the 747?

From looking at the exterior of the aircraft, a considerable amount of interior space is wasted due to the flight deck position. The 747s design allows passenger configuration to be extended to cover the whole lower deck.

However, for a freighter configuration, would the A380 be the optimum design, since the bulkhead could be extended further forward?

Any ideas?
no sponsor is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2003, 19:18
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
"Commonality" and "aerodynamics".

From the Airbus website...


The A380 will have the widest cabin in the world and a larger cockpit, but pilots transferring from the new generation Airbus family will easily familiarise themselves with it. The usual time for transfer training from the A330 or A340 is expected to be considerably less than the 25 days needed for transfer from aircraft without this commonality.

Aircraft handling is similar and, because the cockpit is halfway between the two principal passenger decks, pilot’s eye height is virtually the same, so taxiing is easier. This cockpit position also improves the aerodynamics at the nose of the aircraft, reducing cockpit noise levels.
stagger is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2003, 20:11
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The flight deck has to be near the pointy nose (to reduce the window wraparound radius so both pilots can see out to either side). So if the flight deck was on either level, the pointy nose would not be in a proper or aesthetic position, so in the true best spirit of committee meetings and European compromise, the flight deck is in the middle! It has to be somewhere, so whatever deck it will take up a certain small pax seating area, but they'll probably have a large galley there anyway so it doesn't matter. As it already has 2 pax levels plus hold/electronics bay/landing gear levels, it would be a bit excessive on such a stubby design to add a bubble fuselage for the flight deck on top! I'd say they had it bang on right
Notso Fantastic is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2003, 21:52
  #4 (permalink)  

I'matightbastard
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Notwithstanding the previous excellent responses, I would have thought the UPPER deck would be the perfect place for it in the freighter configuration, or am I getting too nostalgic for the Bristol Beverly.
Onan the Clumsy is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2003, 22:00
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Age: 83
Posts: 3,788
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Onan:

You don't mean the Blackburn Beverley do you?
JW411 is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2003, 01:11
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We forget that the A380 will not be the first full double-deck airliner. Where did Breguet put the flightdeck on the Sahara and Provence types ?
Golf Charlie Charlie is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2003, 05:08
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 4,787
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
The A380 flight deck is not on the lower deck, it's actually between them. It appears you will have to ascend a small flight of stairs from the lower deck to get to the office.

The B747 was designed with the upper flight deck from conception so that it could be used as a freighter with a lift nose shoulod it not be sucessful as a passenger aircraft. But I think that it was also designed that way because it was envisaged it could compete for a USAF requirement for a very large airlifter whose specification required nose loading. (Lockheed got the order with the C5 Galaxy).

The upper flight deck is very cramped as a result of being squeezed into the top of the airframe. Also, the lift nose on the frieghter is not as useful as you would think. For a start, you can't load the aircraft from the nose only as you will start up with all the weight at the back which means the aircraft will sit on it's tail if not supported, or will take a hammering structurally if supported. Also, the upper deck protrudes into the fuselage which restricts the height of the pallets being loaded which would reduce the volume of freight significantly. For these reasons, the rear door is the door normally used for loading/unloading on freighters. The nose door is only really useful for outsize loads which won't go through the rear door.
Dan Winterland is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



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.