Could some of the Airbus fans here comment about the reliability of Der Spiegel? Are they like Business Week and Boeing and spouting gloom and doom? The article seemed to lay it on a bit thick. Comments?
there was also a bit at the end saying
But that's certainly not news that is going to please Airbus's airline customers, who are already moaning about soaring fuel costs. German national carrier Lufthansa, a major Airbus customer, is already estimating internally that the A380 will consume 14 percent more fuel than Airbus has officially disclosed.
Wow. Seems suspect. Where did they get this from? 4-5% would be bad, hard to believe that they could miss by that much. This part of the article is what made me suspect the rest...
Please keep the comments slightly above flame level. I am hoping for a discussion not a flame war.
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1624 times:
I can't comment on Der Spiegel's neutrality or reliability, but they better be able to defend the allegation on increased fuel consumption! However, they seem to have "locked on" to the A380 as of late.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5578 posts, RR: 49 Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1612 times:
Any of these publication, be it Business Week or Der Speigel can report on general problems at each of the OEMs but they don't have a real good grasp of the issues concerning aircraft design and manufacture and accrdongly tend to blow certain issues out of proportion.
The thing is they can report on the A380 and the 787 but time will tell(along with actual customer usage and feedback) if either airplane is up to snuff or a flying lemon.
"Der Spiegel" in general is a weekly newsmag aimed at entertaining notorious "intellectuals" who are fond of reading "how not to do" stories without ever bothering to come up with better ideas. "Der Spiegel" is not worth considering for technical competence.
But the article isn't that bad. It touches some of the root causes for the A380 problems, like the knowledge drain caused by "Dolores" (DOllar LOw REScue"), the implications of the ongoing struggle for power between German and French management, e.g. being unable to agree on common solutions for various problems, and the byzantine organization. If only "Der Spiegel" had bothered to read this week's Aviation Week, they would have reported much more substantial information, though.
Where the article is way off is the 'weakness' of the A380 tail, but that was covered in another thread ad nauseam.
Heavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 697 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1513 times:
If this 14% higher than planned fuel consumption were anywhere close to the truth we would be seeing customers cancelling their A 380 orders ad falling over themselves ordering the 747-8 or even 744s instead. I do not see any of this happening so the Spiegel must err - once again.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
Tom_EDDF From Germany, joined Apr 2000, 451 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1484 times:
We had the 14% discussion before. It's highly misleading.
What that number refers to is a Lufthansa document (guess it was internal) that showed a fuel consumption *per available seat kilometer* that is 14% higher than what Airbus advertises. This is purely attributed to the delta between the 555 seats standard configuration Airbus bases their figures on vs. the actual configuration LH is planning to use. I think it was something like 3.3L/100km vs. 2.9L/100km with some rounding also coming into play.
Der Spiegel, while a credible news source in general, has shown a negative bias towards Airbus and the Hamburg facility in general for the last years or so, and some of their articles have been proved dead wrong.
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4969 posts, RR: 46 Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1484 times:
Quoting Pygmalion (Thread starter): German national carrier Lufthansa, a major Airbus customer, is already estimating internally that the A380 will consume 14 percent more fuel than Airbus has officially disclosed.
I can't believe this fairy tale keeps on living on! It is simply the result of people who have no idea what they're talking about pulling some numbers they've gathered completely out of context, doing some elementary math and then passing it off as fact. Here's what they did:
They compared the fuel burn per seat of the A380 according to Airbus to the (again, per seat) number that LH used. I believe the numbers were something like 2.7 l/seat/100 km for Airbus and 3.1 l/seat/100 km for Lufthansa. (I could be off a bit here, but you get the drift). From that, they concluded the A380 used 14% more fuel than advertised. What they didn't take into account, however, was that the Airbus number was based on the 'typical' configuration of 555 seats, while the Lufthansa estimate is based on the number of seats they plan to get in, which is far less. Less seats means higher fuel consumption per seat.
It is quite staggering that this complete bollocks is passed on as fact by this magazine again, and again, and again. A perfect exapmle of extremely shoddy journalism.