Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A380-800? Do You Think This Is An Error?  
User currently offlineLax From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 2290 posts, RR: 3
Posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2767 times:

I saw this item on another site today...............

"Air France (Paris) signed a firm contract June 18 for ten 550-seat Airbus A380-800s (+ four options) with deliveries starting in November 2006."

Is this a misprint.....Or will the first A380's actually be A380-800's!! (-800's already?! Seems strange?? What happened to the first 7 series?)



17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBLACK BOX From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2721 times:

All to do with the "Double Deck" of the aircraft, the number 8 represents 2 cabins one above the other.

User currently offlineLax From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 2290 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2699 times:

HUH????

I know this isn't right, BlackBox. The -800 indicates the "series" model of Airbus A380. The double-deck has nothing to do with it.


User currently offlineMightyFalcon From Oman, joined Jun 2001, 384 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2688 times:

Although it sounds strange, the A380-800 IS the 550 pax version. The A380-900 will be the 650 pax one.
Such numbering would give room for maybe an A380-700 carrying 450 passengers? Why giving up the -100 to -700, no idea?
Someone?
Black Box, you're right... almost! The explanation you gave is for the 8 of 380. The 8 represents two windows on top of each other and by the way... a double-decker.



The sky has no limit...
User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 30
Reply 4, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2676 times:

Airbus decided to take this numeration, to mark the upper end of this pruduct. The A380-900 will be the biggest A380. Perhaps Airbus will also develop an A380-700, which was previously dubbed as A380-50. THis would be a shortened A380-800 with more range. But the airline's interest for this aircraft type was too small to justify a go ahead.

Regards
Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineBLACK BOX From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2669 times:

Wanna bet, remember we are talking about the French, not Boeing.

The next A/C series should have been the A350, however Airbus went direct to the A380 for the very reason I mentioned in my reply about the double-deck cabin.

Just because aircraft manufacturers have had sequential numbering in the past, means nothing. Airbus have a A380-800 model to HIGHLIGHT the 2 decks "twice".

I know it seems odd, but there ya go.


User currently offlineLax From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 2290 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2663 times:

Hi MightyFalcon........

Thanks for the info.

BlackBox.......I guess you were right (if you were referring to the "8" in 380 that is). Sorry to have jumped your case. But I sure never had heard that business before of the "8" meaning "one window above another".

Also........Since reading your replies to this, I've done a Web search and came up with something kind of interesting on Airbus' new Super Jumbo. Take a gander at these proposed stats....................


"Two basic models are currently being marketed, the A380-800 (formerly A3XX-100) passenger model seating up to 555 in three classes and the A380-800F (formerly A3XX-100F) freighter version. Additional extended range, passenger/cargo, and stretched models are also under consideration. If all goes according to plan, the first A380 will enter service sometime in 2005 or 2006."

HISTORY:
First Flight planned for mid-2004
Service Entry

(A380-800) planned for October 2005 (with Singapore Airlines)
(A380-800F) planned for October 2007


CREW: 2 flight crew


PASSENGERS: (A380-700) 481 in three classes, 608 in one class
(A380-800) 555 in three classes, 840 in one class
(A380-900) 656 in three classes, 840 in one class


ESTIMATED COST:

(A380-800) $225 million
(A380-900) $246 million


AIRFOIL SECTIONS:
Wing Root unknown
Wing Tip

unknown


DIMENSIONS:
Length (A380-700) 222.56 ft (67.9 m)
(A380-800) 239.50 ft (73.0 m)
(A380-900) 260.26 ft (79.4 m)
Wingspan 261.83 ft (79.8 m)
Height 79.00 ft (24.1 m)
Wing Area 8,920 ft2 (830.0 m2)
Canard Area

not applicable


WEIGHTS:
Empty (A380-700) 575,405 lb (261,000 kg)
(A380-800) 606,000 lb (274,875 kg)
(A380-800F) 548,000 lb (248,570 kg)
(A380-900) 630,520 lb (286,000 kg)
Typical Load unknown
Max Takeoff (A380-700) 1,190,495 lb (540,000 kg)
(A380-800) 1,190,495 lb (540,000 kg)
(A380-800F) 1,285,295 lb (583,000 kg)
(A380-900) 1,300,725 lb (590,000 kg)
Fuel Capacity internal:
(A380-700) 575,185 lb (260,900 kg)
(A380-800) 575,185 lb (260,900 kg)
(A380-800F) 575,185 lb (260,900 kg)
(A380-900) 658,300 lb (298,600 kg)
external: not applicable
Max Payload

(A380-700) 160,935 lb (73,000 kg)
(A380-800) 187,390 lb (85,000 kg)
(A380-800F) 330,695 lb (150,000 kg)
(A380-900) 209,440 lb (95,000 kg)


PROPULSION:
Powerplant (A380-700) four Rolls-Royce Trent RB-967 turbofans
or four Engine Alliance GP-7267 turbofans
(A380-800) four Rolls-Royce Trent RB-967 turbofans
or four Engine Alliance GP-7267 turbofans
(A380-800F) four Rolls-Royce Trent RB-975 turbofans
or four Engine Alliance GP-7275 turbofans
(A380-900) four Rolls-Royce Trent RB-975 turbofans
or four Engine Alliance GP-7275 turbofans
Thrust (A380-700) 267,960 lb (1,192 kN)
(A380-800) 267,960 lb (1,192 kN)
(A380-800F) 299,435 lb (1,332 kN)
(A380-900) 299,435 lb (1,332 kN)


PERFORMANCE:
Max Level Speed at altitude: 595 mph (955 km/h) at 35,000 ft (10,675 m), Mach 0.89
at sea level: 390 mph (630 km/h)
cruise speed: 560 mph (900 km/h) at 35,000 ft (10,675 m), Mach 0.85
Initial Climb Rate unknown
Service Ceiling 43,000 ft (13,120 m)
Range (A380-700) 8,750 nm (16,200 km)
(A380-800) 7,800 nm (14,450 km)
(A380-800F) 5,620 nm (10,410 km)
(A380-800R) 8,750 nm (16,200 km)
(A380-900) 7,800 nm (14,450 km)
g-Limits unknown


KNOWN VARIANTS:
A380-700 Originally known as A3XX-50 or A3XX-50R, proposed extended range model with shortened fuselage for 481 passengers
A380-800 Originally known as A3XX-100, first production model seating 555 passengers
A380-800C7 Proposed combination passenger/cargo model based on A380-800 with room for 7 cargo pallets
A380-800C11 Proposed combination passenger/cargo model with room for 11 pallets
A380-800F Originally known as A3XX-100F, dedicated freighter based on -800 model
A380-800R Proposed extended range model based on A380-800 for 555 passengers
A380-800S Proposed reduced range model based on -800
A380-900 Originally known as A3XX-200, proposed stretch model with longer fuselage for 656 passengers
A380-900S Proposed reduced range -900 model


KNOWN OPERATORS: Air France
Emirates Airlines
International Lease Finance
Singapore Airlines
Qantas
Virgin Atlantic

-------------------------------------------------

Now that site had some serious data, eh?  Smile/happy/getting dizzy  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineR.I.P TWA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2657 times:

Interestingly enough, Airbus releases their higher # models first A330-300, then A330-200, A340-600, then A340-500. All the lower number models have longer ranges, Higher #, more passengers.

User currently offlineBLACK BOX From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2648 times:

And as for other variants like a -900 or -700 or anything else, Airbus will be doing well just to get the standard model (-800) up and running.



User currently offlineMightyFalcon From Oman, joined Jun 2001, 384 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2647 times:

Hi LAX,

The 8 in 380 symbolising 2 windows on top of each others and therefore the double-decker is the very explanation from Airbus itself when it officially launched the A3XX as A380. (Noel Forgeard's - Airbus CEO - speech during the commercial launch of the A380)



The sky has no limit...
User currently offlineLax From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 2290 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (13 years 3 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2641 times:

Thanks MightyF. .......... You learn something new on here every day, huh??  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Airbus heretofore had always numbered its aircraft in order (starting with A300, then 310, etc.). Now we're jumping from 340 to 380 (because of the "windows" explanation as you stated).

Although, if you ask me, the "windows" explanation seems kind of silly. Why not just go in order, like they've always done since Airbus' first jetliner first hit the runways in 1972.....and just go with A350 for the Super Jumbo??

Don't take me wrong, I believe your explanation about the windows....I just think it's a bit silly.



User currently offlineQantas737 From Australia, joined Jul 2000, 738 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (13 years 3 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2609 times:

Lax, thanks for those stats. This is not a mistake of yours (I don't think, as I am guessing you copied it and pasted it into your post). But I found this odd when looking at the passenger capacity on the proposed models.

(A380-800) 555 in three classes, 840 in one class
(A380-900) 656 in three classes, 840 in one class

Both the stretched version and the original version have 840 in one class, odd. Obviously it is a misprint as the sheer mechanics of it are mind boggling (Austin Powers talk  Big grin ).

Just thought I would point it out.


User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (13 years 3 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2560 times:

Does it mean the -900 is going to be "the biggest forever"? The aircraft is supposed to be in production for some 50 years, isn't it (all right, no way less than 30)? Looks that right now they are sure there will be no double-stretch. A bit strange...

User currently offlineMightyFalcon From Oman, joined Jun 2001, 384 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (13 years 3 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2543 times:

Lax, there's been some confusion here: the story about the two windows is one of the reasons explaining why Airbus has choosen A380 instead of 370 or 390 or else.
Airbus was looking for a big numbering, as far as possible from A340, to mark this aircraft as the top end of their range. They couldn't choose A4.. as this one is kept for the A400 and other future aircraft from the Airbus Military Company (AMC).
They could have gone for A500 or 510 (5XX)... but then loose the concept of family they want the operators to keep in mind. A500, let's say, is too far and different from A300, 310, 320,....
This is why Airbus sticked, from the begining (remember A3XX), with the "3" figure linking this plane to the rest of the A300, 310, 320, 330, 340 family: if this plane is called A3.. then people will think it has obviously a certain commonality with the others.
A380 name gives Airbus enough room for future models: A350, A360 and A370.
So why not A390: the A380 is suppose to be the largest aircraft Airbus will ever build but... Who knows? Maybe once they will have to build an even bigger one, still using that commonality concept and A390 will be then available. Plus the windows idea as official explanation.
All that stuff is called marketing and communication. All manufacturers (planes, cars...) invest quite a lot of money in that kind of reseach before naming their product.
Sorry guys for having been so long... but I hope it's been of some help to you.



The sky has no limit...
User currently offlineGreg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (13 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2509 times:

The fact that the number '8' is very lucky in Asia was not overlooked, either.

User currently offlineGUNDU From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (13 years 3 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2505 times:

Qantas737:The 840 passenger figure is just the expected maximum,when it is certified the actual number may be even more.


GUNDU  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineEarly Air From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 611 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (13 years 3 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2499 times:

I think they were planning on starting with the -200 series.

Rgds,
Early Air


User currently offlineThe Coachman From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1429 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (13 years 3 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2480 times:

I thought the 8 was supposed to represent the two fuselage tubes, not windows on top of the other. Look lengthways about the plane and I thought it was supposed to represent two fuselage tubes, not two windows. But I maybe wrong.

The Coachman



M88, 722, 732, 733, 734, 73G, 73H, 742, 743, 744, 752, 762, 763, 772, 773, 77W, 320, 332, 333, 345, 388, DH8, SF3 - want
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...
Do You Think This Is Possible? posted Tue Oct 18 2005 14:59:43 by RootsAir
Do You Think This Is Correct? posted Wed Mar 9 2005 19:16:03 by CVGpilot
Do You Think This Picture Has An Odd Look To It? posted Sun May 20 2001 13:30:22 by 757PF
Do You Think This Will Fly? posted Fri Oct 21 2005 00:55:56 by Air380
Do You Think There Is A Dwnloadable Timetable For. posted Sun Oct 6 2002 18:31:37 by Deltadude8
How Much Do You Think This Cost? posted Sun Jun 2 2002 18:28:00 by Delta777-XXX
What Do You Think This Plane Was? posted Sat Aug 5 2000 16:57:32 by Dandy_don
RDU Fans - What Do You Think About This? posted Tue Jun 15 2004 18:36:43 by FlyPIJets
What Do You Think Will Happen In This Industry? posted Wed May 19 2004 05:21:16 by Klwright69
What Do You Think Of This Paintscheme? posted Thu Feb 26 2004 04:40:23 by BA