"A380 is a zero-crash aircraft" say Airbus
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4. Lufthansa/Landing Over Run
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am only pointing out 380 will not suffer same as early 320's.
Had 320 Aircraft/Pilot interface training been up to scratch at the start of 320 ops, Airbus sales would be through the roof now.!!!
Had 320 Aircraft/Pilot interface training been up to scratch at the start of 320 ops, Airbus sales would be through the roof now.!!!
Paxing All Over The World
Am only pointing out 380 will not suffer same as early 320's.
That is not to invite such things but any new machine as complicated as the 380 (nothing to do with size) will have teething troubles. Nothing works straight out of the box - not even 100% of matches! So, we must just guard against the failures and be watching out for things going wrong. For, go wrong they will.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The British part of the EU
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, using the last 50 years advances in technology as an example....in 50 years time the 'advanced technology' of the A380 will be the equivalent of.....a Comet? a DC3? (and that doesn't take into account the obvious acceleration in tech over the next 50 years)
Paxing All Over The World
Hang. You naughtly leg-pulling little devil you!!! But I shall take the bait. My suggestion is not to do with the generation of technology but the newness of it.
When typewriters were invented they would have gone wrong quite a bit until people worked out how to make them and better and operate them better. Trains, planes and automobiles all followed the same process. The difficulty for new a/c is that they will have systems (or variations of) that are new and they cannot be right 100% first time. The Comet taught us some lessons and any series of related prangs will teach a lesson.
When developing a new motorcar, it is cheap and simple to test them to destruction and to drive them into walls to see how they behave. With a/c we have to (generally speaking) model on computer and then wait to see if any real prangs occur. Who knows what lessons the A380 will teach? Perhaps none. Perhaps only less critical systems will fail but empirical testing is the only one that we learn by.
Naturally, no one wants a prang but only a few admit that they will happen. The commercial world understands as well politicians that, customers/voters do not want to know the truth.
--------------------
"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different." Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
When typewriters were invented they would have gone wrong quite a bit until people worked out how to make them and better and operate them better. Trains, planes and automobiles all followed the same process. The difficulty for new a/c is that they will have systems (or variations of) that are new and they cannot be right 100% first time. The Comet taught us some lessons and any series of related prangs will teach a lesson.
When developing a new motorcar, it is cheap and simple to test them to destruction and to drive them into walls to see how they behave. With a/c we have to (generally speaking) model on computer and then wait to see if any real prangs occur. Who knows what lessons the A380 will teach? Perhaps none. Perhaps only less critical systems will fail but empirical testing is the only one that we learn by.
Naturally, no one wants a prang but only a few admit that they will happen. The commercial world understands as well politicians that, customers/voters do not want to know the truth.
--------------------
"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different." Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: SEA (or better PAE)
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thinking of the advanced tech and A380 I assume you will see more of this debate with 787 and A350 then on A380.
What is really "new technology" on 380 is very questionable. Size is not the matter, apart from the operational side (passenger loading/unloading) - meaning that this size of a/c are flying for some time (see the issue of vortex generation).
Anyway new technologies will appear with 787 and 350 so let us see how good will be the application of stuff used on CFR 23 built models (GA, some of the business aviation models) in large commercial type a/c.
What I specifically mean is the new engine and the all-composite fuselage of that size.
To claim for that absolute safety (and reliability) will be a challenge.
For 380 it is quite a safe estimate.
Cheers,
What is really "new technology" on 380 is very questionable. Size is not the matter, apart from the operational side (passenger loading/unloading) - meaning that this size of a/c are flying for some time (see the issue of vortex generation).
Anyway new technologies will appear with 787 and 350 so let us see how good will be the application of stuff used on CFR 23 built models (GA, some of the business aviation models) in large commercial type a/c.
What I specifically mean is the new engine and the all-composite fuselage of that size.
To claim for that absolute safety (and reliability) will be a challenge.
For 380 it is quite a safe estimate.
Cheers,
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many other 320s had the close shave? How many 737s have been lost due to rudder hardover?
Whenever somebody fouls up in an Airbus they immediately blame 'the technology'. Why didn't we seem the same damning of the 757 after 'the technology' flew a 757 into a mountain in Cali? If you tell the autopilot to do daft things it'll do them unerringly. It's not a substitute for airmanship and common sense.
Whenever somebody fouls up in an Airbus they immediately blame 'the technology'. Why didn't we seem the same damning of the 757 after 'the technology' flew a 757 into a mountain in Cali? If you tell the autopilot to do daft things it'll do them unerringly. It's not a substitute for airmanship and common sense.
In the same time, there are 4 A320 hull losses. Once again, to any reasonable person, operator error is the cause -- dumb things that people do from time to time. But an unfamiliar interface philosophy can and does help people do dumb things, particularly if the years of training the operators have received in the past now becomes negative training.
What's amazing about the A320 is that, even with an airshow crash a few months after its certification, it managed to sell pretty well.
It took the 757 13 years to crash. That might be why people don't think immediately of automation-related crashes with it; or maybe it's just that it doesn't feature a full glass cockpit and fly-by-wire control system.
Technological advance has its pitfalls, above all when "experienced" humans are thrown in the mix. For the A380, I'm sure Airbus has many competent people working on trying to find the problems before fate does. But the stakes are high, especially since the pride of European Industry is riding on this. The closest parallels to such political stake being put in an airliner are the Concorde and the Tu-144.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread, which started as a result of a poor translation and / or a misunderstanding, continues unabated. (Long live free speech!). It has thus become less a matter relating to Airbus than to the continuing need for PPRuNe to service the needs of those who just need to express their notions, prejudices and hang ups.
I say this as the latest posters don't seem to have read the early part of the thread. They just seem to dip in to express their 2.5 pence worth regardless. An undoubted consequence of free speech ...
I say this as the latest posters don't seem to have read the early part of the thread. They just seem to dip in to express their 2.5 pence worth regardless. An undoubted consequence of free speech ...
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"This is your computerized crew speaking. Welcome aboard your Air Erroneous flight 678 this morning - the most advanced aircraft in the skies. Your captain and first officer have been superseded by computers.
"So fasten your seat belts, sit back and relax, and know that nothing can possibly go wrong (click) ... possibly go wrong (click) ... possibly go wrong (click) ..."
"So fasten your seat belts, sit back and relax, and know that nothing can possibly go wrong (click) ... possibly go wrong (click) ... possibly go wrong (click) ..."
As for design flaws or trouble spots etc, how about the DHL A-300 which was hit outside of the left engine on departure from Baghdad a couple of years ago? It still amazes me that those pilots were able to fly it back arouhd by using the throttles for all primary control, never mind airspeed. What did they consume later to reduce the huge adrenaline surge? Does any other airline now fly into Iraq?
Maybe this was not a design flaw, because the aero. engineers never anticipated a heat-seeking missile impact, but if all hydraulic lines ran together (fusing?) in one small area, is this sort of hydraulic "junction" common in McD. Douglas, Boeing, Fokker, Dornier, Embraer and CRJ aircraft? Maybe it is far enough from the engines to minimize the chance of damage from turbine blade shrapnel ?
Maybe this was not a design flaw, because the aero. engineers never anticipated a heat-seeking missile impact, but if all hydraulic lines ran together (fusing?) in one small area, is this sort of hydraulic "junction" common in McD. Douglas, Boeing, Fokker, Dornier, Embraer and CRJ aircraft? Maybe it is far enough from the engines to minimize the chance of damage from turbine blade shrapnel ?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JAL123 (747SR) had it's 'hydraulic nexus' in the tail, which protected well from engine disintegration, but unfortunately left it very vulnerable to aft pressure bulkhead failure.
IIRC newer aircraft (certainly SLF-carrying ones) have valves in the hydraulic system to prevent leakage in case of a damaged hose.
IIRC newer aircraft (certainly SLF-carrying ones) have valves in the hydraulic system to prevent leakage in case of a damaged hose.