Airsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 38 Posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1537 times:
Hi everybody,
I just discovered accidentally this piece of information on the EADS website: Exactly today the very first A318´s final assembly started at Hamburg. I thought one or two of you might be interested to hear that.
VULINDLELA744 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 517 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1457 times:
Cool!!!!! Can't wait to see the final product. It will be a great a/c for the long thin trans can routes.
Airlinelover From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 5580 posts, RR: 27 Reply 2, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1450 times:
Cool! Although, I thought I'd read somewhere that the A318 project was scrapped....I Think it was on the plane spec database on..well.. HERE!!
Chris
Lets do some sexy math. We add you, subtract your clothes, divide your legs and multiply
Mark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 6 Reply 4, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1385 times:
"L'il Stubby"'s going to come out somewhat late to market though, even though essentially it's just a 319 "minus five (fuselage) frames". Let's see, certification maybe early 2003? (by which time the CRJ900 supposed to be in service, as well as maybe the ERJ170 and Dornier728JET)
John Walton From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 117 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1261 times:
Entry into service end 2002, so certification will be way before early 2003.
Airbus.com: "136 firm orders have already been placed for the A318. The first flight is scheduled for January 2002, with entry into service at the end of 2002. "
Plus, there already is a small A320 derivative, the A319. Arn't their regualtions on how many derivatives are allowed on one particular airframe without new certification?
Mark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 6 Reply 14, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1209 times:
Klaus. I really don't know, I'm just sorta surprised the CRJ900's gonna take so long to certify --3Q 2002, even though its first flight was this past February. Eighteen months, even though it's really very little more than a stretched 700, with some landing-gear and APU (and of course engine) upgrades.
So I'm just working from there, and not understanding how come it's gonna take that long. (on the other hand, both Embraer and Fairchild Dornier were announcing just really-speedy certifications, like several months or something, even though both of those are brand-new airframes. So I put it just down to marketing-team optimistic spin, since I don't know what's going on there, either, to make those procedures so short).
B747-437B, y'know it's not just Airbus, Boeing got mighty speedy certification for its 777s for instance, when they were announced (especially the derivatives).
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20850 posts, RR: 55 Reply 16, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1198 times:
Mark_D: I really don't know, I'm just sorta surprised the CRJ900's gonna take so long to certify
Who knows... Might be interesting to have insight into the details of certification.
Maybe in that case they were having trouble meeting some specifics...
I just thought a derivative would get through faster especially if it only differs in a few aspects. I would expect they´d have to do most flight tests, though. Details, anyone?
Mark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 6 Reply 17, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1191 times:
Klaus Well from some quarters anyway --B747-437B might be able to shed light on this--, apparently there are some politics involved at times? I don't know.
Couple weeks back though I did notice Bombardier's giviing a few details in their latest "Regional Update Magazine" pdf for June-july, something like 65 percent of the flight envelope been tested, and comments from the pilots about it flying 'just like a 700'. they got a few other details mentioned about hours logged, and what the modifications are as well, relative to the 70-seater.
I'll try to have a look at some of the procedural details involved, from FAA and JAA. Political concerns of course, if any, would be tougher to discern.
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20850 posts, RR: 55 Reply 18, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1188 times:
Interesting stuff. Keep going...
Mark_D: Political concerns of course, if any, would be tougher to discern.
Hmmm. I think any manufacturer who thought they were being shorthanded would raise a big stink over this.
For the moment, my theory still is that somebody screwed up on either side. It´s usually the safest bet.
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 517 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Feb 2001, 262 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 117 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Belgium, joined May 2000, 397 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
