Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
German Media: A380 Overweight And Late  
User currently offlineMham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3528 posts, RR: 3
Posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13641 times:

As reported in Suddeutsche Zeitung

GERMANY

Saturday, December 17, 2005

The time frame for the A380 is becoming more and more uncertain as
evacuation tests for the A380 have been postponed again. The factor
wind was not incorporated in the planning for the evacuation tests,
which were originally planned for November. It is questionable whether
Airbus will be able to keep promises to its customers, anyway, because
the A380 is still eleven tons too heavy and fuel consumption will
presumably be 14 percent higher than anticipated. Lufthansa has changed
its calculations from 2.9 to 3.3 liter per seat kilometer. (Süddeutsche
Zeitung - Ind, Ph)

102 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21456 posts, RR: 60
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13608 times:

Does that short article have a source for it's information?


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13565 times:

Quoting Mham001 (Thread starter):

The time frame for the A380 is becoming more and more uncertain as
evacuation tests for the A380 have been postponed again. The factor
wind was not incorporated in the planning for the evacuation tests,
which were originally planned for November. It is questionable whether
Airbus will be able to keep promises to its customers, anyway, because
the A380 is still eleven tons too heavy and fuel consumption will
presumably be 14 percent higher than anticipated. Lufthansa has changed
its calculations from 2.9 to 3.3 liter per seat kilometer. (Süddeutsche
Zeitung - Ind, Ph)

My Oh My.
When will all the A380 conspiracy end. I just posted an Update of the A380 Flight test program from a very reliable source, Flight International. Now we are presented with this article, which basically states the opposite.

Can any of our German Member enlighten us all if this article is from a credible source?

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12286 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13562 times:

Let's hope this information is inaccurate, for if it is not, it would be a severe blow to the A380 program. Missing the fuel target by 14%, in particular, is not acceptable!


Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineGARPD From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2604 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13553 times:

Strange article.

The Sueddeutsche Zeitung doesn't strike me as the most clued up rag when it comes to aviation matters.



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3506 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13526 times:

Quoting Mham001 (Thread starter):
Saturday, December 17, 2005

The time frame for the A380 is becoming more and more uncertain as
evacuation tests for the A380 have been postponed again. The factor
wind was not incorporated in the planning for the evacuation tests,
which were originally planned for November. It is questionable whether
Airbus will be able to keep promises to its customers, anyway, because
the A380 is still eleven tons too heavy and fuel consumption will
presumably be 14 percent higher than anticipated. Lufthansa has changed
its calculations from 2.9 to 3.3 liter per seat kilometer.

Looks like astonishing example of journalist incompetence.


User currently offlineRj111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13504 times:

I don't think even Airbus are capable of missing fuel burn targets by 14%

User currently offlineJush From Germany, joined Apr 2005, 1636 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13471 times:

Well were to start.
I searched sueddeutsche.de for that article and i found one article about a postponed evacuation test. I cannot access this article cause i'm not registered pay-member there. So maybe another member has access.

I certainly find it strange cause if i remember correctly Airbus reported that the A380 is doing better than expected in terms of fuel consumption. 14% higher?
Who said that...

Quoting Mham001 (Thread starter):
The factor
wind was not incorporated in the planning for the evacuation tests,

So what's that supposed to mean? Factor wind? Sounds strange to me.
Or does it have to do something with the slides ar blown in the air????

I'm really eager to read the real article. But until then i highly doubt the figures mentioned above.

EDIT: Found this article via google but i don't think it's a highly trustable source. Anyway it reports problem with the slides from the upper decks.
Article only in German but don't forget i think it's a doubtful source.
http://www.han-online.de/HANArticleP...fd9ac870d300d500b700c10031513308a4

Regds
jush

[Edited 2005-12-20 16:22:04]


There is one problem with airbus. Though their products are engineering marvels they lack passion, completely.
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 13417 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 5):

Looks like astonishing example of journalist incompetence.

You may very well be correct...but at least back up your opinion with at least some reasoning.

Anyway, I trust Flight International more than I would a general newspaper on these matters. The Sueddeutsche Zeitung is not a bad newspaper though if I remember correctly.


User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3506 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13351 times:

Quoting N79969 (Reply 8):
You may very well be correct...but at least back up your opinion with at least some reasoning.

They should back up their statement about 14% higher fuel consumption.

Reasoning for my opinion is simple. Airbus itself reported A380 fuel performance better than expected. How come local newspaper got it 14% higher huh?


User currently offlineMham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3528 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13285 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 9):
They should back up their statement about 14% higher fuel consumption.

Reasoning for my opinion is simple. Airbus itself reported A380 fuel performance better than expected. How come local newspaper got it 14% higher huh?

Looks like they are using a Lufthansa source.


User currently offlineGARPD From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2604 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13245 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 9):
They should back up their statement about 14% higher fuel consumption.

Reasoning for my opinion is simple. Airbus itself reported A380 fuel performance better than expected. How come local newspaper got it 14% higher huh?

After the SQ debacle, its clear you must take a pinch of salt when reading what Airbus say re the A380 program.

I'm not saying this 14% figure is true, but I certainly would not be surprised if Airbus had "stretched" the truth when say they found the fuel consumption to be better than expected.



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlinePlaneDane From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13237 times:

Quoting WINGS (Reply 2):
My Oh My.
When will all the A380 conspiracy end.

Conspiracy? Where is the conspiracy, WINGS? Who is orchestrating this conspiracy that you have identified? What is their motive? What do they hope to accomplish? Please, give us your information.

Otherwise, it just seems like yet another article we can choose to believe or not and nothing more.

Quoting Danny (Reply 5):
Looks like astonishing example of journalist incompetence.

Danny, could you provide us with links to information that refutes what is being claimed in this article? If you could do that for us it would greatly help.


User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4295 posts, RR: 36
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13173 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 5):
2.9 to 3.3 liter per seat kilometer.

This is a prove the writer of this article has no clue what he's writing about. Even the fuel born of Concorde was like a factor 100 below 3.3 liter per seat kilometer. He probably meant 3.3 liter per kilometer.



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13151 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 9):
They should back up their statement about 14% higher fuel consumption.

Reasoning for my opinion is simple. Airbus itself reported A380 fuel performance better than expected. How come local newspaper got it 14% higher huh?

Back up with what? It is a mass-circulation newspaper and not an engineering journal. They are general reporting information for public consumption.

The role of the media is not to accept the public statements of politicians, businesses, and so on at face value. Airbus is not a newspaper and their duty is to make money to their shareholders. Part of their job includes media relations which is not the same thing as reporting the news.

Come on, you know all of that.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5731 posts, RR: 48
Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13101 times:

Well the proof wll be in the pudding when all is said and done:

Separation - ICAO will make it's final recommendations mid next year based on test along with Airbus, Eurocontrol, and the FAA. Remember safety will be paramount for all involved

Fuel burn - forget what a newspaper or Airbus says the actual fuel burn will be. The airlines will fly them with passengers in real world conditions and the fuel burn will either be what Airbus promised or it'll be higher.

Weight - I believe that it is widely known that the A380s final configuration as built came in overweight.

Evac tests - These test have to be carried out at some point. No one, except Airbus, knows why it's trully been delayed but prior to this plane carrying passenger no. 1 these test have to be done and done to the satisfactions to the appropriate regulatory agencies that will certifiy the no of passengers that the A380 will be allowed to carry. Again safety of the passenger will be paramount and if the evac tests show that the aircraft have to be certified for fewer passengers than what Airbus will claim so be it.

[Edited 2005-12-20 17:07:40]


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3506 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13068 times:

Quoting N79969 (Reply 14):
Back up with what? It is a mass-circulation newspaper and not an engineering journal. They are general reporting information for public consumption.

Does this give them right to publish any BS they can come up with?


User currently offlineMacc From Austria, joined Nov 2004, 1026 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 13037 times:

just a few thoughts about the article linked above

http://www.han-online.de/HANArticleP...fd9ac870d300d500b700c10031513308a4

It mentiones problems with weight and slides. However, the weight issue is dicsussed by a representative from an environmental protection group from hamburg, who are fighting against the extension of runways at finkenwerder.
That lady suspects airbus to secretly spread roumors of a higher weight to press further extension of runways at finkenwerder.  bigthumbsup 

another not specified source is quoted in regards to the slides. their huge dimension could cause problems when activated in windy conditions. (what a surprise). they compare it to the 310 incident from hapag lloyed here in vienna.  biggrin 

an airbus spokesman is quoted as refusing all this rumours. weight can be different depending on airlines individual cabin configurations.

all in all: nothing new, nothing factual, and no need to discuss further.

cheers  santahat 



I exchanged political frustration with sexual boredom. better spoil a girl than the world
User currently offlinePavlin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 12990 times:

If it would be 14% higher it would fit into the 777-300 range

User currently offline11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1717 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 12889 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 16):
Does this give them right to publish any BS they can come up with?

I suspect this is just sloppy reporting, and yes, they have a right to do that. It's part of having a free press. Newspapers make mistakes all the time, and I assume that's what happened here. The Airbus press office will likely see this report, contact the reporter, correct the information, and the paper will print a correction.

A380 customers probably keep a pretty sharp eye on the testing program. If Airbus really missed the fuel burn by that much, we would have heard something before now. There would be order cancellations and complete chaos in Toulouse.



WhaleJets Rule!
User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 12836 times:

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 12):

Conspiracy? Where is the conspiracy, WINGS?

PlaneDane, did you actually take the time to read the article? If so it seems to me that you don't quite know the definition of a Conspiracy Theory. Its usually made up by someone that has lack of information. In other words its made up with a lot of BS

If you want a recent and reliable news article regarding the A380 flight progress take a look at this article published in Flight International.

http://www.flightinternational.com/A...powers+on+through+flight-test.html

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 12):
Who is orchestrating this conspiracy that you have identified?

Good question. Someone should ask the journalist involved with this article.

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 12):
What is their motive?

Let me guess. Give Airbus a good laugh.

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 12):
What do they hope to accomplish? Please, give us your information.

Well you shouldn't be asking me for information. It would be more accurate on your part to ask the Journalist the hard facts that has led him to this conclusion. Like all good journalist they should offer a reliable source so that they can back up their claim.

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 12780 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 16):
Does this give them right to publish any BS they can come up with?

How do you know it BS? That may be the case. However the fact that Airbus says otherwise does not prove them wrong.

I defer to the FI article that Wings has linked elsewhere. However I do not think even their article directly contradicts what the German newspaper alleges.

The FI article is about certification testing while the Zeitung is referring to economic/engineering performance.


User currently offlineAreopagus From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1369 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 12653 times:

Quoting WINGS (Reply 20):
If so it seems to me that you don't quite know the definition of a Conspiracy Theory. Its usually made up by someone that has lack of information. In other words its made up with a lot of BS

It's only a conspiracy "theory" (really a hypothesis, not a theory) if it claims that a number of people have conspired to do something. If a number of people are independently doing bad things, it's not a conspiracy. He's asking who the conspirators are supposed to be.


User currently offlineArt From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3378 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 12616 times:

From the article quoted:

Quoting Mham001 (Thread starter):
Lufthansa has changed its calculations from 2.9 to 3.3 liter per seat kilometer.

This is very bad news indeed. Assume 500 seats in the aircraft. Over a 10,000 Km leg the fuel burn for each seat increases from 29,000 L to 33,000 L. Total fuel burn increases from 29,000 x 500 L (14.5 million litres) to 33,000 x 500 L (16.5 million litres).

Carrying that extra 2 million litres of fuel (say 1,500 tonnes extra) would certainly make the A380 very uneconomic to fly, even if it were possible to get it off the ground in the first place.


User currently offline764 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 623 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 12575 times:

Not to be mean, but your calculations are wrong. We're not talking 29,000 litres for 10,000 kilometers, but rather 290. So the increase would be from 500*290=145 ,000 to 165,000 litres.



[Edited 2005-12-20 18:20:16]

25 Daedaeg : I'm just having a hard time believing this article. 14% increase in fuel consumption seems incredibly high. Maybe they meant 1.4%. Despite Airbus hav
26 AirFrnt : Rather then blindly attack the messenger, can anyone confirm this information? In particular can we figure out if a) The evacuation tests have in fac
27 Clickhappy : In reply 17 Macc has said that Airbus has responded to, and denired, these rumors. If that is true (no reason to believe it isn't) then this article m
28 Gigneil : But not attributing it. The what? Yes. Every article written up to this point. Its not our job to prove them wrong, rather for them to prove that the
29 N79969 : That is my sense as well. It is hard to imagine that they could get that far out of engineering tolerances.
30 GBan : I did subscribe to the newspaper in question and read the whole article. There are more "informations" in the article that seem questionable, like: A
31 MarshalN : That's what I've been thinking reading this thread. While it is certainly possible for Airbus to have messed up and underdeliver for fuel consumption
32 Gigneil : That part is true. N
33 Art : 764, I don't think you are being in the slightest bit mean and I am SURE my calculations are wrong since they are based on data that I am SURE is wro
34 AirFrnt : Actually, that one is confirmed.
35 GBan : Actually the author does compare a number he claims to have read in some current Lufthansa press release (3.3 l) with a number given by Airbus to Sue
36 Post contains images GBan : And I thought that I kind of followed the discussion
37 Post contains links Oldeuropean : The quote from the Süddeutsche (from the thread starter) looks like taken out of the context and is nearly similar to the quote of the enviromental a
38 Post contains images MarshalN : Hmmm, well, I can't read German, so I'm just relying on the tidbits here But the way you reasoned it seems to make sense. If the Airbus config vs the
39 Post contains links GBan : This is the Lufthansa source in English. It does state 3.3 l but I cannot find any remark that the numbers have changed: http://konzern.lufthansa.com/
40 Post contains images BR076 : " target=_blank>http://konzern.lufthansa.com/en/down...0.pdf Yes you are right, in the comparisation tabel it states 3.3 litres of kerosene per passen
41 PlaneDane : Actually, that isn't quite the correct definition of a conspiracy, WINGS. A true conspiracy involves participation by a group to do something conside
42 Jacobin777 : here's my take....I think the plane is overweight by about 1-1.5%, but the plane fuel use is better than expected, hence the plane is flying "to speci
43 Kappel : In the latest issue of airlinerworld there is a blurb about a380 progress. It says that the aerodynamics are better than expected, approach speed has
44 707lvr : Wish there were more Art's (Chris Young.) Maybe it's because aviation uses so many varieties of measurement that you have to be very careful when any
45 N79969 : I think there is a great degree of confusion about flight performance and economic performance. I think there has been plenty of written about flight
46 Jascmil : That's not uncommon -- it's called "On Deep Background" sourcing. That certainly doesn't make it credible, but chances are that the journalist didn't
47 PM : "Not acceptable"? Read "instant death"!! No airliner these days misses its target by anything close to 14%. As suggested above, I might groan and liv
48 BandA : ditto
49 Tom_EDDF : As stated in reply #30, if the author of the article is Tim van Beveren, it's not credible whatsoever and a shame that a high profile newspaper like S
50 Post contains links and images GBan : The same journalist writes in his latest book ("Das Risiko reist mit", Sep 2005) that the A380 "is too heavy, too big and in case of an emergency pos
51 Tom_EDDF : I also remember his TV apparence (think it was "Berlin Mitte") after the Concorde accident in paris... it was a joke... speculations without any found
52 Jush : Well i'll do that cause i'm curious but like i already said the source is highly doubtable .... Never said anything else Regds jush
53 TheSonntag : German press, even good newspapers like Süddeutsche, often write crap when it comes to aviation matters. Real good sources are Aero International, Fl
54 Lehpron : It was and it is, respectively, why rehighlight the issue?
55 AJRfromSYR : I like the A380, but from what I've seen over several recent posts, if FI says something bad about Airbus we are to take it with a grain of salt, but
56 Thrust : Looks like we are seeing a history repeat. The 747 was faced was problems of similar proportions when it was being built....it was almost 200,000 poun
57 Tom_EDDF : Acknowledging it's slightly left-wing, I would still consider Sueddeutsche being a credible source in general, but Tim van Beveren is really not the k
58 AMSSFO : C'mon guys, can't you do the math? Even this so-called 'journalist' could do the math...3.3 / 2.9 = ....1.14... there you have your 14%!! Didn't you
59 Lumberton : Are you sure about the 200,000 pounds overweight? That's 200 tons! I suspect there is an extra zero or two.... (If this was meant to be ironic, I cer
60 AJRfromSYR : Source?
61 Prebennorholm : Huh, that means that the the A380 will use 70 - 80 times more fuel per seat/mile than a B737. And its range will be less than 100 miles!!! Even a sin
62 AJRfromSYR : Don't forget how big this plane is...
63 Abba : Champion has stated less then one percent over target weight while Gillette says that the 787 is about 1.5 percent (if they haven' bettered that by n
64 Areopagus : 200,000 pounds = 100 tons. But at any rate, it is not a credible figure.
65 Dougloid : Yep. It's called freedom of the press. Douglas wanted to do that too on the MD11 and the certification authorities didn't bite. They did the emergenc
66 BoeingBus : What would be his motives? If its a pack of lies than Airbus could potentially sue for libel? I mean spreading lies in Germany must be illegal??? So
67 Br343 : I think that the conspiracy "theory" is just great, so the Airlines will decide what they Buy because some journalists say that the A380 is not so suc
68 Post contains images StuckInCA : I hope I'm just missing the sarcasm in your post.
69 Abba : Well - I think that in Europe these laws are much more liberal (or more liberally enforced) than in the US. I believe that it will be immensely diffi
70 BoeingBus : Yeah... the newspaper fires him. That is how you deal with the situation but obviously the newspaper editor must agree with him if there is no retrac
71 Theredbaron : Another A380 insider telling the Airplane is paperweight... yawn....
72 PlaneDane : I really hope you're just joking. The first B747 models experienced engine overheating problems. That's it. How is that the same as compared to the A
73 Abba : Which - in particular in Germany and Scandinavia - will make it fashionable to write negative things about the project. If only for that reason the e
74 Gatorman96 : I guess we will only know for sure how the A380 performs once it is in service. Regardless of the source (FI, Airbus, a news agency), I think the info
75 Post contains images Jacobin777 :
76 Magyar : If the A380 can transport fuel in that order of magnitude then I believe Airbus has invented a new type of freight plane. I would call it "the flying
77 Kaneporta1 : I can't wait for the new Airport 2006 movie to come out. It's about an A380 crashing, after its wings break mid-air, because of it's weight, just afte
78 GBan : Please note that this article was a side filler on the page with ads for used cars (KFZ-Markt). The author of the article was given, which usually is
79 Jush : Next time he should defenitely use a calculator cause he seems to have serious problems with the decimal
80 Post contains images Glideslope : A pinch? My, you are a generous person. I'd bring a Dump Truck.
81 RichardPrice : Cant provide a source, but I have heard this figure used by a Boeing exec on a couple of Discovery Channel programmes about the 747. The first aircra
82 Post contains images GBan : 3.3 is 13.79% more than 2.9 - not far off. But he might not use a calculator anyway, knowing how dangerous modern technology is
83 MIAMIx707 : Yes they have all the right in the world as free press. They can even call it an ugly box with wings if they want to. LMAO, that corrupt American gov
84 RichardPrice : Claiming falsehoods rather than opinions can end them up in court, free press or not. Just because they have a printing press and are allowed to use
85 Post contains images Jush : hehe oh my god how embarrasing. One shouldn't think that took math for my a-levels and can't do my maths. Regds jush
86 DistantHorizon : Sometimes a conspiracy do not have do be orchestrated. You must know that. It is only needed some common interests and motives. And there are plenty
87 N79969 : There are apparently plenty in Europe who suffer from delusions of grandeur.
88 DAYflyer : Oh good Lord, will someone just tell us the truth already? 14% off fule burn has got to be pure BS. Overweight, perhaps. But 14% higher fuel burn is s
89 Post contains images GBan : Well, I tried several times It is indeed.
90 Post contains images Br343 : Hi Sorry if I don’t explained well, but my post have some sarcasm, I really don’t believe on Conspiracy theory! I Totally Agree, one of Europe big
91 N79969 : I think GBan and the Sonntag have provided some good background information....it is up to the reader to decide whether the story is any good or not.
92 Joni : In Europe fuel consumption is cars is reported as liters per 100km, and this is meant to be liters per seat-100km as other posters have correctly men
93 Dougloid : Tunis Wortman was a lawyer in New York who wrote an interesting little work called "A treatise concerning political enquiry and the freedom of the pr
94 RichardPrice : Neither 'Freedom of the Press' nor 'Free Speech' means freedom from consequence or absence of responsability. If you print untruths or poorly researc
95 Tom_EDDF : Don't celebrate too early! This guy hates new technologies in aviation, especially the use of advanced materials and cockpit automation techniques. H
96 Abba : Another issue - no matter you might have a "winable" case - for a company to consider is whether or not your public standing will be positively effec
97 Post contains images NIKV69 : I could have told this you this months ago. Oh so true. After the first test flight this thing has been behind. We will have to wait and see but I th
98 Abba : Wrong!
99 A319XFW : From what I heard after the first few flights the test crew were pleasantly surprised on how the fuel consumption was slightly lower than expected. (I
100 AerospaceFan : Speaking as an American and as a Boeing fan, I nevertheless hope that these reports of the A380's allegedly being overweight are untrue. The A380 seem
101 PlaneDane : Another pathetic post from Kaneporta1. This sort of sadistic sarcasm serves no useful purpose and is so disrespectful of those who have lost loved on
102 Post contains links Dougloid : But you subscribe to what we here call the British Rule cf. the American Rule (each side pays its own costs), which is that the loser pays, unless yo
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...
German Media Say Berlin May Aid Airbus Sub-contrac posted Sat Nov 4 2006 18:49:44 by Osiris30
Lufthansa´s Mayrhuber On A380, 747-8 And B787/A350 posted Wed Sep 27 2006 10:54:16 by Keesje
Airbus A380 MSN006 and MSN008 posted Tue Sep 19 2006 01:05:16 by AeroplaneFreak
Nice LH A380 Animation And Information posted Mon Apr 17 2006 21:42:42 by LH492
Difference In 80's Airline Food And Late 90's-00's posted Tue Feb 14 2006 04:45:33 by TheFlyGuy2
A380: Airlines And Engines? posted Tue Aug 16 2005 05:45:01 by Brendan03
A380 Delivery And First Destinations posted Mon Dec 27 2004 17:15:51 by WindowSeat
A380 Flaps And Landing Gear Compared To 747 posted Fri Nov 26 2004 00:17:58 by A380900
A380 Doors And Slides Management System posted Wed Oct 13 2004 18:10:11 by Jacobin777
Emirates: A380 Seats And IFE Order posted Wed Jul 21 2004 13:25:53 by Teahan