AirWillie6475 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 2448 posts, RR: 1 Posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 17390 times:
In some of other topics I have read that some think that the a380 is just two a345's combined into one and thats it has old technology. And some say that the 787 has innovative technology. As far as technology goes what will be so innovative about the 787 or a380.
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 17293 times:
First I think you should have used a less provocative title. The A380 is clearly a brand new airplane and will be equipped with some of latest enhancements and new material technologies. The idea that this airplane is two combined A340-500s is absurd. It is hard to know where to begin on fixing that statement.
Having said that A380 is the cutting edge in evolving airplane technology.
The 787 will be revolutionary in terms of the materials, aircraft power, and manufacturing techniques.
You have a point that is interesting, but really ought to choose your words more carefully. It probably is not too late to fix the title.
Teva From France, joined Jan 2001, 1869 posts, RR: 16 Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 17186 times:
Yes, sure, the A380 has only old technologies from ze old Europe
* Large utilization of composite material in structural parts such as wing box (carbon) and fuselage (glare)
* high pressure hydraulics
* cockpit ergonomy, with the introduction of the track ball
Ecoute les orgues, Elles jouent pour toi...C'est le requiem pour un con
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 65 Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 17140 times:
The A380 is likely to be the last four engine airliner and one of the last to use an aluminium fuselage, bleed-air driven systems, 8000ft pressurization, etc. History is likely to view it along with the A350 as a dinosaur. The B787 breaks a lot of new ground. History seems likely to view it as the first of the second generation of jet airliners.
The assertion that the A380 is just two A340s bolted together is silly. That would have eight engines, not four. Clearly then, the A380 must be two A330s bolted together.
MauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2487 posts, RR: 27 Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 16652 times:
A380 2 A340-500's huh? Right...... so the A380 has 8 engines, blended winglets? owh and if its based on the A340-500, why is it old then? if it was based on the A340-500 it would be a new plane since the A340-500 is new....
Udo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 16401 times:
...keep in mind, that's been said many times in the past as well
I know, and we have had many discussions about that already. But it would require a real monster engine to replace two A380 engines...much more a monster than the GE90 is today. What about the wing which has to carry that thing? And that wing would have to be very high to take the engine below.
And we know it's already not quite easy to carry a spare GE90 to certain places - what about an engine even bigger, by some 40% or 50%?
Fact is it is impossible to power an A380-sized by two engines today. Another story in 30 years maybe. No reason to call the A380 design ancient or outdated in any way just because it carries four engines.
Sjoerd From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 361 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 16345 times:
I believe the step to the A380 (from A346 or B773) is greater than the step between A380 and B787.
The A380 is the first aircraft to use very large composite parts (for example : finbox (wider than B787 fuselage) and wingbox) constructed in a very similar way (applications of layers that are then cured using heat) as parts of the B787. So if you think that Airbus is behind with the composite technology you're wrong, the real step forward is done already. The wing of the A350 will have a higher percentage of composites than the on of the B787.
The wing of the A380 is also very advanced, it is the only curved (to that extent) wing on a commercial aircraft, giving more lift for a smaller wingspan.
The B787 will have the first large composite fuselage (the larger windows and higher cabin pressure are a consequence of that) and the highest percentage of composites overall and advanced engines compared to current ones with the same thrust.
N328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6317 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 16329 times:
More by quantity, but not by percentage. Using composites and metals in the using lamination or with composites over a metal frame is a drastically different matter than an aerostructure composed entirely of composites.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
Lazybones From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 146 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 16284 times:
Actually the A380's 5,000 psi hydraulic system was developed in the United States under U.S. Department of Defense contract.
And the jet engine was invented by Sir Frank Whittle (UK). Whats your point?
787 is a totally revolutionary airframe, just the fabrication process itself is a jump. Boeing need this to get ahead of the game, where Airbus are kind of feeling their way with composite technology in a more reserved manner. I'm very interested in seeing the 787 once complete, its definitely the way forward.
For some good reading on composites go to www.scaled.com (no introduction required!)
But it has to be said that the true historic revolution in aviation will only occur when we need to replace kerosene.
Sjoerd From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 361 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 16263 times:
But it has to be said that the true historic revolution in aviation will only occur when we need to replace kerosene
I totally agree and am very curious to see wether after the B787 and A350 another aircraft is developped that burns kerosene. The B789 (EIS 2012) may very well be the last "classic" aircraft (dinosaur ?).
[Edited 2005-01-31 23:21:57]
Flanders + Wallonnia + Brussels = the UNITED STATES of BELGIUM
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 15666 times:
How do you mean to ask?
Technologically, in terms of stingy aviation evolution, they will have arrived at the same time, within 5 years of each other.
But I would suppose the appearance to pax will be different. If Boeing can convince airlines to keep the concept seats in 787, that will have the most dramatic effect; plus them giant slit windows. A380 may be weird for folks who are used to things being the same, the idea of sitting on top and it being about as wide as the bottom -- damn.
Same effect, same technology -- and I am being general, do not go into the bleedless engines hoopla, i don't care and niether do most pax.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
Lazybones From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 146 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 15561 times:
Guys (Udo, ConcordeBoy)
What you really feel comfortable sitting with 554 other people with just 2 engines! I kinda feel the 777-300 is the biggest i would fly one with just 2 engines. Especially after seeing the pictures of the EK 777 engine failure which occurred at my local airport (that be Melbourne Intl).
I like the Lewis engine index, no more than 175 pax per engine! Otherwise pack parachute!
Skymileman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 15056 times:
Neither airplane is all that impressive to me. I don't think commercial aviation has done anything impressive since the jet engine was invented. What happened to the good old days when every airplane was a huge technological advancement? The A380 boasts size, the 787 boasts efficiency, so what...
Lazybones From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 146 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 14989 times:
Skymileman, I know what you mean. But lets face it, its the result of us all wanting ever cheaper fares and ever more choice. Both 787/A380 follow this principle in one form or another.
Who knows the next leap may well come from space travel, IE get into low earth orbit and back. Crack this and technically you get to any airport on earth in less than 4 hrs! And for a bonus you get an awesome view.
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 65 Reply 22, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 14537 times:
GE started development of the GE90 when? About 15 years ago? If Boeing were to ask for a 150,000lb thrust engine to be ready to fly in 2010, it would be ready. We heard all the same arguments against large twins with the B777. The arguments were bogus then and they are equally bogus now.
Anyway, I don't think Boeing will build a double-deck airliner. I think they will replace the B777-300 and B747Adv with the largest circular cross section twin that is practical as a single decker (perhaps with galleys, crew rest, lavs, passenger sleeping bunks, etc. upstairs -- but no passenger seating upstairs). Such an aircraft would need perhaps 130,000 or 135,000lb thrust engines. It is not inconceivable that the GE90 could be further certified to produce such thrust.
Thrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2686 posts, RR: 10 Reply 24, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 14174 times:
I agree that probably the best way to answer the A380 is with a fresh design, a brand new airplane, conceivably a twin. This would allow for a brand new engine design that could get around the GE90's power limits. I could almost promise a twin would cut the A380's career short VERY quickly. But i think that Boeing should probably wait 15 years or so before they introduce it. That way the A380 will have aged and airlines would be looking for something brand new.
Fly one thing; Fly it well
25 N328KF: Thrust: I don't think many people outside of GE knows the power limits. They may very well be able to scale it that high. They've already shown a rema
26 A350: The A380 is likely to be the last four engine airliner The A380 carries more pax per engine than the 787. So, why should it be less efficient? A350
27 AirWillie6475: Thanks for the replies. Most have talked about the technical innovations but does anyone know of the internal innovatoins like the interior lighting i
28 N328KF: A350: Both the A380-800 and 787-9 travel about the same distance. In three class configuration, 550 / 4 = 137.5 for the A380. For the 787-9, it would
29 Stirling: Zvezda said: The B787 breaks a lot of new ground. History seems likely to view it as the first of the second generation of jet airliners Then Lazybone
30 MD-90: The most revolutionary composite aircraft ever built thus far (including the 787) was the Rutan Aircraft Factory Vari-Eze. A glassbackwards foambuilt
31 N79969: Lazybones, See reply from Teva and my post will then make sense.
32 A350: A remark to our twin fans: I do know that the development is going away from the quads and the future will be dominated by twins. However, this does n
33 Astuteman: To answer the original question, there is no doubt in my mind that the 787 is more innovative that the A380. The definition of innovative that I use i