Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1980 times:
I've seen some offhand comments in other threads that emergency evacuation of the A380 may present some technical problems, i.e., the upper deck can't be evacuated in a timely manner without using escape shoots that would cause injury to evacuating passengers because of the speed of descent down the shoot. Is this a real or imagined problem?
Stefandotde From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1950 times:
You can be sure that A knows about the rule concerning evacuation and they were working very hard on it - and they have a solution, otherwise it would be sort of suicide building an aircraft without a solution.
QantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 35 Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1946 times:
At the risk of sounding like I'm just brushing the possible issues surrounding A380 evacuation aside and blindly leaving my faith in Airbus, Airbus is a respectable aircraft manufacturer and they most certainly wouldn't fly any aircraft without it being proven safe in all respects. Sure it's a long way down, but there are definitely means of ensuring reasonable descents...
how many times is a thread like this going to appear?
They evacuated 580 pax from a 744D including the upper deck shoots which had to handle more pax per door than the A380 will. So why wont they be able to do it from a A380?
And do you think Airbus would be making this damn thing if they thought they couldnt?
Sorry if im being very sarcy but i find im repeating this on a weekly basis.
BOAC707 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 278 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1768 times:
I can see the concerns on the height and rate of decent. Remember, it's not the fall that gets you, it's the sudden stop (at the bottom)
And as far as "how many times is a thread like this going to appear?"...I think we have a lot of reading to go before we scratch the surface of the Northwest DC-9 empire
Roberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1722 times:
And as far as "how many times is a thread like this going to appear?"...I think we have a lot of reading to go before we scratch the surface of the Northwest DC-9 empire
what so only when a topic breaches the amount of DC-9 threads is it then deemed excessive.
4jaded From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 248 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1674 times:
It seems to me that Airbus will be able to get the folks off this aircraft via slides without a problem. The point that they will get hurt going down the slides is mute. People have broken legs and hips etc jumping out of 737's and DC9's mostly due to the short slides they have /people jump out and miss the slide all together/. Of course this will happen. It is expected that the slides are there to preserve life in an emergency and give folks the chance to live and not perish say in a fire but they have never been designed to gently guide you to the ground so that you could fix your hair and walk away. Most likely you will be running, crawling, or clawing away from that airplane. These devices are meant for life and death situations not as Disney rides for a thrill.
Backfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1562 times:
All this talk makes me laugh.
The current rules on passenger evacuation are old and almost completely ambiguous. Even if the A380 meets the criteria, that doesn't make it "safe" because the evacuation regulations were never drawn up for such an aircraft.
MD80Nut From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 870 posts, RR: 10 Reply 9, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1550 times:
Remember that the A380 isn't as big a leap sizewise over what's available now as the 747 was back in '70, plus they seem to have put in enough exits in the upper deck to do the trick. I'm sure they wouldn't have gone ahead with the project if they couldn't evacuate it properly. And like 4jaded pointed out, people have gotten injured evacuating much smaller aircraft.
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15867 posts, RR: 66 Reply 10, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1422 times:
The slides are lined with a material that brakes the slide, so once you reach terminal velocity you won't be accelerating anymore. You'll just have a burned tush. Better than a broiled body anyway.
As has been stated, the 744 has upper deck slides too. Also, the number of pax per door is not markedly different from the 744. I did the math once in tech ops, but can't be bothered to look it up.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7440 posts, RR: 5 Reply 11, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1293 times:
I have no doubt that Airbus will be able to physically demonstrate the emergency exit requirements are met. They load the plane up and prove that they meet the regulations. Simple. Once the first plane is completed Airbus should be able to get rid of this "lingering question" for once and for all.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, 
From France, joined Jan 2001, 1868 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 278 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15867 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
