A380 launch etc (Merged)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First flying A380 will have RR Trent 900 powerplants.
The PW/GE "Alliance" GP7000 engine isn`t completely new,it essentialy uses a reworked GE90 core,and PW4000 main fan.
Info on GP7000 here
Trent 900 info here
The PW/GE "Alliance" GP7000 engine isn`t completely new,it essentialy uses a reworked GE90 core,and PW4000 main fan.
Info on GP7000 here
Trent 900 info here
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mostly FL360-380, M0.78
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The A380 will enter commercial service at Heathrow in the summer of 2006, but test flights at the airport will begin later this year. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...445214,00.html
I guess the 380 will be at the Paris airshow this summer and at next years Farnborough airshow..
I guess the 380 will be at the Paris airshow this summer and at next years Farnborough airshow..
Guest
Posts: n/a
Is the A380 launch realistic?
Hello All,
I'm sure this is an issue which is still being discussed but I'm curious to get a thread going on it to find out more about this humungous monster which Airbus has brought out. I wanted to discuss the A380 launch from a "required runway length" and "airport upgrades and money required" point of view...
My argument is simply really:
(1) What kind of runway requirements are expected for the A380 with a full or near full load? According the Airbus specs, I was flabbergasted to see that runways of 16,000 feet and higher are required for this Big Bird!
Can the A380 make "shortfield" take-offs and landings and how short can be the runway lenghts?... 11,000 feet? 10,000?...?
(2) If the above is true, then how many airports does Airbus expect the A380 to land on and how many are able to afford to upgrade their runways to these lengths?
(3) Having said all this, does Airbus really expect to make any money with the A380? I mean, it is obvious the standard 11,000 feet runway won't cut it if the airlines want to carry the full passanger/baggage/cargo loads so will airlines really save any money by carrying 75% capacity flights just so the thing will even have enough runway to take-off?!
John
I'm sure this is an issue which is still being discussed but I'm curious to get a thread going on it to find out more about this humungous monster which Airbus has brought out. I wanted to discuss the A380 launch from a "required runway length" and "airport upgrades and money required" point of view...
My argument is simply really:
(1) What kind of runway requirements are expected for the A380 with a full or near full load? According the Airbus specs, I was flabbergasted to see that runways of 16,000 feet and higher are required for this Big Bird!
Can the A380 make "shortfield" take-offs and landings and how short can be the runway lenghts?... 11,000 feet? 10,000?...?
(2) If the above is true, then how many airports does Airbus expect the A380 to land on and how many are able to afford to upgrade their runways to these lengths?
(3) Having said all this, does Airbus really expect to make any money with the A380? I mean, it is obvious the standard 11,000 feet runway won't cut it if the airlines want to carry the full passanger/baggage/cargo loads so will airlines really save any money by carrying 75% capacity flights just so the thing will even have enough runway to take-off?!
John
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.boeing.com/assocproducts/...ydocs/ctol.pdf
Take a look at page 36.Even Boeing knows its a lie!!
Looks like about 3000m / 9800ft will be sufficient.Its looking to be on par with the A330-200 for Take off run at MTOW.
This will be a very profitable aircraft,have no doubt.
Take a look at page 36.Even Boeing knows its a lie!!
Looks like about 3000m / 9800ft will be sufficient.Its looking to be on par with the A330-200 for Take off run at MTOW.
This will be a very profitable aircraft,have no doubt.
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dont know where you got 16000ft from, I cant think of any 16000ft commercial runways worldwide. As i understood it the A380 has 4 75000lb thrust engines over the 747's 58000lb engines so it has much more thrust and i believe will have similar take off performance to the -400 but at higher weights.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hello Hotel Mode,
Regarding the runway lenghts, I saw them directly in a PDF file (acrobat format) from the Airbus website a few weeks ago but now, they must have removed any links to it as I cannot find it anymore. But believe me, I did not make up that figure but I wanted to confirm what I saw again and now I cannot (unless I saved the file on my home PC - I will verify it tonight and let you know....)
As for the engines, the Airbus "characteristics" page for the A380 gives thrust of 70,000 lbs for the A380 and 76,500 lbs for the Rolls Royce Trent engines. As for 9800 ft... I doubt that very much because if this was true, then the multitude of airports including Montreal, Singapore, New York ... would not be upgrading their runways. By the way - I'm talking about runway requirements with FULL MAXIMUM load, not a partial load...
But please anyone who knows the take-off runway requirements or other specs feel free to give us the link or correct me if I'm wrong...
John
Regarding the runway lenghts, I saw them directly in a PDF file (acrobat format) from the Airbus website a few weeks ago but now, they must have removed any links to it as I cannot find it anymore. But believe me, I did not make up that figure but I wanted to confirm what I saw again and now I cannot (unless I saved the file on my home PC - I will verify it tonight and let you know....)
As for the engines, the Airbus "characteristics" page for the A380 gives thrust of 70,000 lbs for the A380 and 76,500 lbs for the Rolls Royce Trent engines. As for 9800 ft... I doubt that very much because if this was true, then the multitude of airports including Montreal, Singapore, New York ... would not be upgrading their runways. By the way - I'm talking about runway requirements with FULL MAXIMUM load, not a partial load...
But please anyone who knows the take-off runway requirements or other specs feel free to give us the link or correct me if I'm wrong...
John
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought that at first too.Actually the runways are fine,footprint means the runways surface loading is about same as the 777-300s,its the taxiways width and shoulders,gate sizes and that sort of thing which is meaning money needs spending for upgrades.
I believe Airbus were trying to get an ICAO exception so they could operate at the same class taxiways as the 747-400,not sure how that went.
Perhaps the increased runway lengths were for the proposed stretched A380,the A380-900?
But the A380-800 has a giant wing and alot of thrust-I`d be suprised to see the takeoff roll above 10,000ft.
Some interesting information here:
http://www.ecac-ceac.org/nla-forum/I...ument_V2.1.pdf
I believe Airbus were trying to get an ICAO exception so they could operate at the same class taxiways as the 747-400,not sure how that went.
Perhaps the increased runway lengths were for the proposed stretched A380,the A380-900?
But the A380-800 has a giant wing and alot of thrust-I`d be suprised to see the takeoff roll above 10,000ft.
Some interesting information here:
http://www.ecac-ceac.org/nla-forum/I...ument_V2.1.pdf
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look on airbus.com under A380 family for the Airport Planning Document. The 16000ft is a upper max of temperature, MTOW etc. 9-10k ft seems to be more likely on an operational basis.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Take-off runway lengths for A380
Hi MarkD,
Well, I was able to open the airport planning document which for some reason I could not when I was at work...
Here are the two relevant pages which show the runway lenghts at an altitude of SEA LEVEL at maximum MTOW at Std. temperatures. I guess you might be right actually, upon a second look at the charts (see link below), I realized that at the maximum weight at sea level, the plane can take-off using 13,000 feet of runway, but still, this is longer than most airports have.
http://www.content.airbusworld.com/S...LT/AC_A380.pdf
(SEE PAGES 68-75 for the take-off charts for the various models).
In any case, the turning radius and taxiway width is a big expense issue for airports too. I mean, why would an airport spend all this money for a single plane - the 777-200LR and even the A340 series can do just fine and are very fuel efficient. I guess it may be the LONG TERM SAVINGS which Airbus calculated would out-weigh the initial investment of upgrading the airports, is that right?
John
Well, I was able to open the airport planning document which for some reason I could not when I was at work...
Here are the two relevant pages which show the runway lenghts at an altitude of SEA LEVEL at maximum MTOW at Std. temperatures. I guess you might be right actually, upon a second look at the charts (see link below), I realized that at the maximum weight at sea level, the plane can take-off using 13,000 feet of runway, but still, this is longer than most airports have.
http://www.content.airbusworld.com/S...LT/AC_A380.pdf
(SEE PAGES 68-75 for the take-off charts for the various models).
In any case, the turning radius and taxiway width is a big expense issue for airports too. I mean, why would an airport spend all this money for a single plane - the 777-200LR and even the A340 series can do just fine and are very fuel efficient. I guess it may be the LONG TERM SAVINGS which Airbus calculated would out-weigh the initial investment of upgrading the airports, is that right?
John
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Byrna,
The maximum take-off weight of the A380 is 560 tonnes. The required runway length for this is nowhere near the 13,000 ft you are quoting, not even at ISA+15, which is 30 degrees Celsius at sea level.
Not even the A380F with a max. take-off weight of 590 tonnes (I think) is anywhere near your 13,000 ft.
How did you arrive at this number?
The maximum take-off weight of the A380 is 560 tonnes. The required runway length for this is nowhere near the 13,000 ft you are quoting, not even at ISA+15, which is 30 degrees Celsius at sea level.
Not even the A380F with a max. take-off weight of 590 tonnes (I think) is anywhere near your 13,000 ft.
How did you arrive at this number?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Byrna,
OK, I have a printout of page 1, chapter 3-3-2 in front of me. This is for ISA + 15 degrees C, TRENT 970 engines.
According to this graph, the max. take-off weight line (560 t), intersects for a runway at sea level pressure altitude at 9.700 ft runway length.
It intersects with 13,000 ft runway length for an airport pressure altitude of 4,000 ft.
You read 13,000ft at sea level. That's why I asked 'How did you arrive...'
Byrna,
And to put this to rest, no airport is upgrading runways for the A380. An A380 can land on any runway that today takes a 747-400.
The upgrading required at some (!) airports concerns widening of taxiways so that the engines do not overhang on grass etc.
The turning radius of the A380 is actually smaller than that of the 747-400 due to different landing gear geometry and therefore no turning radii have to be \'upgraded\'.
OK, I have a printout of page 1, chapter 3-3-2 in front of me. This is for ISA + 15 degrees C, TRENT 970 engines.
According to this graph, the max. take-off weight line (560 t), intersects for a runway at sea level pressure altitude at 9.700 ft runway length.
It intersects with 13,000 ft runway length for an airport pressure altitude of 4,000 ft.
You read 13,000ft at sea level. That's why I asked 'How did you arrive...'
Byrna,
And to put this to rest, no airport is upgrading runways for the A380. An A380 can land on any runway that today takes a 747-400.
The upgrading required at some (!) airports concerns widening of taxiways so that the engines do not overhang on grass etc.
The turning radius of the A380 is actually smaller than that of the 747-400 due to different landing gear geometry and therefore no turning radii have to be \'upgraded\'.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hi El lute,
I must have missed something was the feeling I was getting. I thought that either the charts are interpreted a certain way or it turns out, I must have looked at the wrong line as the lines are close together...
Only time will tell if the A380 will be popular.
Don't get me wrong - being an aviation enthusiast, I love the idea of having a double-decker airplane in engineering terms and would be curious to fly one in my MS Flight Simulator and fly in one as a passanger. I was just confused about the size and weight of the airplane.
John
I must have missed something was the feeling I was getting. I thought that either the charts are interpreted a certain way or it turns out, I must have looked at the wrong line as the lines are close together...
Only time will tell if the A380 will be popular.
Don't get me wrong - being an aviation enthusiast, I love the idea of having a double-decker airplane in engineering terms and would be curious to fly one in my MS Flight Simulator and fly in one as a passanger. I was just confused about the size and weight of the airplane.
John
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just read in Financial Times that the launch will be sometime next month:
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/95feddc6-96...o1&segid=03058
Any further news on the date?
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/95feddc6-96...o1&segid=03058
Any further news on the date?
Paxing All Over The World
One certainty: It will be announced on airbus.com but no one will committ to a date until a very short time beforehand, I suspect.
--------------------
"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different." Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
--------------------
"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different." Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.