Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A380 Questions  
User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Posted (9 years 11 months 7 hours ago) and read 2884 times:

I have searched many A380 topics in the forum, only to be overwhelmed by baseless rhetoric and senseless AvsB wars. Searching the airchives has been futile. I am sure there is an answer in here somewhere, not sure though I want to spend my day/week/holiday reading through all the related trashtalk to get a quick answer.
AvsB posters need not reply, just the facts.

What airports will be A380 ready when service begins?

What airports have taken on expansion projects in order to be ready?

How many aircraft does Airbus need to sell before the program begins to make a profit?


Does anyone else besides me see any paralells between the Airbus A380 and the Boeing 377? 50 years apart, but surprising in program similiarities.




Delete this User
20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBENNETT123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7469 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (9 years 11 months 6 hours ago) and read 2821 times:


I do not understand the point about the Boeing 377.

Perhaps you could explain.


User currently offlineWhitehatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 11 months 6 hours ago) and read 2790 times:

The only extra requirements for the A380 will be remodelling jetways to load faster. With airstairs any airport that can take a 747 or 773 can potentially service the A380.

It fits into the 80 metre box used to design airport facilities.

Airbus reckon that an order book above 200 will see the program into profit. Personally I think that's optimistic as there are always extra costs which crop up in development.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17000 posts, RR: 67
Reply 3, posted (9 years 11 months 6 hours ago) and read 2778 times:

The only extra requirements for the A380 will be remodelling jetways to load faster. With airstairs any airport that can take a 747 or 773 can potentially service the A380.

Some taxiway turns may need extra surfacing on the inner side of the turn, but in general any airport that can take the 744 or 346 can take the 388. Even without extra airstairs it's quite possible, though it will be slower loading and unloading.

The 388 will have.
- Equal or better takeoff and landing performance compared to the 744
- Shorter jetplume than the 773
- Lower pavement loading that the 773 and 722 (yes the 722 has a very high loading)



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (9 years 11 months 4 hours ago) and read 2721 times:

Thank you for the informative replies. I was under the assumption that the A380 would find it difficult connecting to terminal facilities such as those in LA, Miami and NYC. And once docked, how are terminals going to be able to handle 500+ persons at one time, for one flight, in boarding areas accustomed to, and designed for a maximum of 400? (except in a handful of locations)

My comment about the Boeing 377 arises from my recent purchase of the excellent book by Nicholas Veronico on the same topic.
After reading this book, I found myself having more questions than answers.



Delete this User
User currently offlineRuscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1542 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (9 years 11 months 4 hours ago) and read 2684 times:

The outer engines on the 380 are a problem for FB ingestion. Brisbane airport will need to spend quite a lot of money to eliminate FB ingestion problems for the 380. Sydney can take the 380 but sydney airport has no significant future development potential because of lack of space. Where are Qantas going to service there 380's. ( My bet is some arrangement with SIA) Qantas is in the process of moving their heavy jet maintenance to Brisbane. so should Qantas be paying for the upgrade to accommodate the 380? Although the total weight per tyre is on a par with the 773ER the overall weight of the 380 is higher, so in some cases culverts, bridges, etc may need strenthening.

It is often said that airports around the world had to adapt to the 747, but i don't think the situation is analagous. The 747 was a quantum leap over the 707, but the 380 is a modest increase over the 747, in terms of capacity.

I think the real show stopper with the 380 could be noise. Not engine noise, but airframe noise. If it doesn't meet future standards, it will be fun to watch the European Govts twist and turn to find ways to let it in!

Ruscoe



User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17000 posts, RR: 67
Reply 6, posted (9 years 11 months 4 hours ago) and read 2664 times:

Qantas is in the process of moving their heavy jet maintenance to Brisbane. so should Qantas be paying for the upgrade to accommodate the 380?

When landing "every now and then" for maintenance, potential FOD is much less of a problem than with daily ops. Not that the risk decreases, but at least you don't have to take the aircraft out of line service since it's going to maintenance anyway. But you make a valid point.


Although the total weight per tyre is on a par with the 773ER the overall weight of the 380 is higher, so in some cases culverts, bridges, etc may need strenthening.

Forgot about the bridge thing. The 388 will have much less weight per tyre than the 773ER and the 772.

It is often said that airports around the world had to adapt to the 747, but i don't think the situation is analagous. The 747 was a quantum leap over the 707, but the 380 is a modest increase over the 747, in terms of capacity.

Indeed. The percentage increase is quite modest in comparison.


I think the real show stopper with the 380 could be noise. Not engine noise, but airframe noise. If it doesn't meet future standards, it will be fun to watch the European Govts twist and turn to find ways to let it in!

The main reason for the overweight is the increase in engine size to accomodate engine noise standards.

Airframe noise can be a problem, but Airbus has worked hard to minimize it. We are talking an airframe that can take advantage of quite a few new aerodynamic tweaks unavailable even a few years ago. I have no doubt that they will keep it under control, or that could really be a political hot potato!



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21407 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (9 years 11 months 3 hours ago) and read 2607 times:

As far as I´m aware, the A380 will generate less total noise (engines plus airframe with gear down) than a 747.

User currently offlineCospn From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1605 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2501 times:

I Like what Gordon Bethune Said on the History channel when asked about the A380..There are some markets it will be useful for Like LHR-DEL but I cant think of any city pairs in the Domestic US that need that kind of Capacity.

User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2442 times:

I think the real show stopper with the 380 could be noise. Not engine noise, but airframe noise. If it doesn't meet future standards, it will be fun to watch the European Govts twist and turn to find ways to let it in!

The main reason for the overweight is the increase in engine size to accomodate engine noise standards.

Airframe noise can be a problem, but Airbus has worked hard to minimize it.


How do you minimize the A380 airframe noise problem when it hasn't even flown yet??



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineA380900 From France, joined Dec 2003, 1103 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2271 times:

"How do you minimize the A380 airframe noise problem when it hasn't even flown yet?? "

Like everything else, with computer models!





User currently offlineDeltaWings From Switzerland, joined Aug 2004, 1294 posts, RR: 17
Reply 11, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2253 times:

SFO and Munich are all ready for the a380  Smile


Homer: Marge, it takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen.
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2138 times:

"How do you minimize the A380 airframe noise problem when it hasn't even flown yet?? "

Like everything else, with computer models!


So there are wind tunnels for the actual built aircraft to see if there is an airframe noise problem or not?? I never heard of a building having a huge huge real life sized wind tunnel for tests like this....



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineA380900 From France, joined Dec 2003, 1103 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2109 times:

"How do you minimize the A380 airframe noise problem when it hasn't even flown yet?? "

Like everything else, with computer models!

So there are wind tunnels for the actual built aircraft to see if there is an airframe noise problem or not?? I never heard of a building having a huge huge real life sized wind tunnel for tests like this

Why would you need real size wind tunnel to modelize how noisy an airplane will be? You don't need one to modelize whether it will fly what fuel it will burn and so on. Of course you can be off by a little but you know most of what will happen before you fly the plane


User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 14, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2095 times:

Thanks DeltaWings.
I can now begin the list with,
SFO
MUC

LAX?
JFK?
ORD?
GIG?
BBI?

It's oversize concerns are because of it's wingspan and not length, right?



Delete this User
User currently offlineRichard28 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 1603 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2029 times:

Air frame noise was a customer requirement in the planning stages of the A380. There was a programme on tv the other day, which stated that one of the ways it will get around this problem is by having a slower approach speed.



User currently offlineFlyingKangaroo From Australia, joined Apr 2004, 532 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1961 times:

With Emirates's HUGE order for their A380s, is Dubai actually ready? I know they're building an exclusive EK terminal that can handel the A380, but are the taxiways etc. wide enough? I've been there quite a few times, and noticed that the taxiways are VERY wide, so maybe they are? Any info would be much appreciated!

Thanks!

flyingKangaroo



QANTAS-- The Spirit of Australia
User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 17, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1805 times:

If by BBI you mean Berlin Brandenberg International (at SXF) you are kidding right? There is not a city that could sustain A380 service from Berlin. LAX is not ready for the A380. If QF flies them in (which everyone knows they will) they will have to give up on Terminal 4 and go back to Bradley because the only place the thing can park is the remote gates. The problem becomes more complicated when you realize that LAX is already the worst airport in the US for runway incursions and the size of the A380 will make it that much worse


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineRdu777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 221 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1587 times:

GSO will be seeing the 380 once the Fedex sorting facility opens, I believe in 2009. Correct me if I'm wrong. So they are in the process of preparing for it, and will be constructing a new runway.


Go Wolfpack!!
User currently offlineGsoflyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 1093 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1442 times:

Yes, GSO will be seeing it. New runway being added while the other two are being lengthened.

Also the facility will be operational in 2006/2007...


User currently offlineN685FE From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 451 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1366 times:

FX in ANC is building three additional gates intended for the A380's. They will be used right now for MD11's due to the lack of gates. I am sure you can add all of FX's major hubs as likely candidates for the A380.




psp. lead by example
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
A380 Questions posted Thu Jan 20 2005 05:48:25 by BOEING747400
A380 Questions posted Sat Oct 9 2004 19:31:54 by Airbus3801
A380 Questions posted Fri Sep 3 2004 19:40:47 by Stirling
A380 Questions posted Sat May 22 2004 00:21:33 by FJWH
A380 Bunch Of Questions posted Sun Dec 18 2005 18:00:32 by TaromA380
A380 Tour Questions posted Mon Nov 14 2005 03:09:47 by JrMafia90
A380 Engine Questions...... posted Sat Apr 30 2005 00:51:45 by BCal DC10
Questions A380 About Manufacturing Efficiency posted Thu Jun 10 2004 15:11:51 by Leelaw
First A380 Pic - Questions posted Fri May 28 2004 08:28:09 by A380900
A380-800 Questions And Progress posted Fri Apr 9 2004 14:12:27 by Dmerinop