Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Airbus lets media kick the tires of its repeatedly delayed A380
Seattle Post-Intelligencer ^ | Thursday, February 8, 2007 | LAURENCE FROST

Posted on 02/08/2007 11:06:24 AM PST by skeptoid

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
Same event as yesterday's post but with a photo gallery link including descriptions of seating layout and a couple of front office shots.

Nice wrist support for your keboard!!
Major spin piece.

1 posted on 02/08/2007 11:06:29 AM PST by skeptoid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: skeptoid

The funny thing, I've actually put various engineers to work at different companies here is the US doing work on the A380.

Allot of the Air Frame stress testing and avionics systems were done here.


2 posted on 02/08/2007 11:13:07 AM PST by gjones77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeptoid
From a famous helicopter manufacture.

General, we stand behind our helicopters.

My question is will you stand under them?

Kick the tires all you want guys but no rides!
3 posted on 02/08/2007 11:14:42 AM PST by SomeoneNeedsToSayIt (Socialism: If we ALL can’t be wealthy… we ALL will be poor…)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeptoid
That's way cool looking. Kind of disconcerting to see a cockpit without control yokes. So, if you're the pilot it's good to be left handed and if you're the co-pilot it's good to be right handed.

The side stick is kind of funky but I've had the worst weather ever on an Airbus and it was a smooth ride from Toronto to San Francisco. I don't know how a comparable Boeing would be since I've never ever seen weather that bad through an entire flight.

I still think the A380 is one ugly bird on the outside.

4 posted on 02/08/2007 11:23:18 AM PST by Lx (Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gjones77
I have not heard any criticisms of the aircraft as a flying machine. Its the production problems, development costs, size of market vs break-even point, etc,etc.....
The article states: The aircraft is the seventh A380 under construction and will be delivered to Etihad Airways in 2009.

They are taking people for joyrides on the seventh airplane that won't be delivered until 2009
!! Is this a 'production' unit?
Just when do they plan on recouping their $15 billion plus costs?

This is only a "newspaper story" but I get a knot in my stomach reading it.
There is so much at stake and it don't look real rosey for them

5 posted on 02/08/2007 11:49:07 AM PST by skeptoid (BS, AE, AA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: skeptoid

Looked at the pictures. Nice shots of the interior in
business and first class. No pictures at all in the
"steerage" section where most of us have to fly.


6 posted on 02/08/2007 11:56:22 AM PST by kkalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lx
I still think the A380 is one ugly bird on the outside.

Exactly. The interior shots were beautiful, but the outside is really unattractive.
It looks bloated and stubby.

None of the grace and beauty you see in the 747 or even the 777.

7 posted on 02/08/2007 4:36:57 PM PST by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: skeptoid

In pic #12, the silohuette of the nose reminds me of the monster in the movie, "Aliens."


8 posted on 02/08/2007 4:50:32 PM PST by DeweyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeptoid

looks as if it would cost airbus more to cancel the 380 than it would to continue the manuf. process. interesting.


9 posted on 02/08/2007 9:46:40 PM PST by ARW3A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeptoid

you cannot plan a project like the A380 on budget and on time.

Quote a single project of that magnitude that was done on budget and on time.

"Time by time the turtle has to stick out it's head to crawl further." Rumsfeld 2004


10 posted on 02/09/2007 1:24:03 AM PST by Rummenigge (there's people willing to blow out the light because it casts a shadow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lx; Jorge
I still think the A380 is one ugly bird on the outside.

I prefer to fly inside a plane.
11 posted on 02/09/2007 2:25:00 AM PST by MHalblaub ("Easy my friends, when it comes to the point it is only a drawing made by a non believing Dane...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MHalblaub

You're obviously never flown AirTran...


12 posted on 02/09/2007 6:51:42 AM PST by Lx (Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Rummenigge
The 747 flew pretty much on time; development to first delivery in 4 years, but deliveries were delayed because of engine problems.

The 747 was TWO AND A HALF TIMES bigger than anything before. (C-5 was coming along then, though)

It was conceived and designed during the time the SST was in the works, competing with scarce funds.

The A 380 is only 25% bigger than the current 747 and actually smaller than the AN 225 and the engines are performing quite well from th git-go.

My point is: the 747 was on time and it nearly broke Boeing because it was such a leap from its predecessors.

13 posted on 02/09/2007 5:38:31 PM PST by skeptoid (BS, AE, AA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: skeptoid

It's very esy to build a plane 100% larger then a 737. It's near impossible to build a plane in the classic shape that is 20% bigger than the Airbus A380.

The demands on the wing construction do not grow linear with the size of the plane.


14 posted on 02/14/2007 1:32:16 AM PST by Rummenigge (there's people willing to blow out the light because it casts a shadow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Rummenigge
I gotta ask:

.. A.) Who said anything about a 2 X 737?

and

. . [2] Is anyone planning to build a plane 'in the classic shape that is 20% bigger than the Airbus A380'?

15 posted on 02/14/2007 2:18:52 AM PST by skeptoid (BS, AE, AA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: skeptoid

I said something about scaling problems in engineering and used the 737 and the a380 as an example. Doubling size was easier when planes where smaller - much easier in fact.

Was that to hard to understand ? In that case I apologize for beeing to brief.

2 I don't think so - I guess the next step in per passenger efficiency comes with the major revolution of having planes that are designed into a monowing (like the b2).

That would certainly demand for a change of the whole infrastructure of the airports involved and therefore force many passengers to reach their targets not directly but via a hub.

This is pretty much the niche into wich the 787 will fit - it will not be as efficient as a large scale aircraft but make this up by the ability to be optimized for it's size.

But it will represent pretty much the outer limit of effciency in it's class. (It's highly improbable that there's much potential for major cost savings in that class after the 787.)

So the answer on the rapidly growing demands in passenger cpacity together with the limitations in fuel and increasing demand of unpoluted air - there will be larger aircraft.


16 posted on 02/14/2007 3:03:25 AM PST by Rummenigge (there's people willing to blow out the light because it casts a shadow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Rummenigge
It's highly improbable that there's much potential for major cost savings in that class after the 787.

Correction:

It's highly improbably using current technology.

17 posted on 02/14/2007 3:09:37 AM PST by Erik Latranyi (The Democratic Party will not exist in a few years....we are watching history unfold before us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi

that's correct.

If there was a nuclear driven air plane there would be potential beyond 787


18 posted on 02/14/2007 3:44:22 AM PST by Rummenigge (there's people willing to blow out the light because it casts a shadow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Rummenigge
If there was a nuclear driven air plane there would be potential beyond 787.

How about gravimetric manipulation?

19 posted on 02/14/2007 3:46:23 AM PST by Erik Latranyi (The Democratic Party will not exist in a few years....we are watching history unfold before us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi

that would end the "your luggage is overweight" discussions :)


20 posted on 02/14/2007 4:22:20 AM PST by Rummenigge (there's people willing to blow out the light because it casts a shadow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson